Sky and Tel's anti-bible editorial

Sky and Telescope magazine's editor just produced
an editorial regarding the relegation of
evolution as some weak theory against
"creationalism" as some kind of fact.
I agree with them. But I'd go further;
Anyone teaching that evolution is a theory
on par with the fantasy of "creation" should
be tossed in jail. These religious, uneducted nitwits
need to be taught a lesson before they drag a section
of the United States back to the Middle Ages. There is
religious freedom in the United States, but there are
also laws against child abuse and warping a child's
mind so as to negatively effect them in later life
with that literalist, Christian mumbo-jumbo IS abuse.
The advent of home-schooling is another area that needs
to be looked at carefully. Guidelines as to who is
qualified to provide this to children should be put
in place.
-Rich

"RichA" wrote in message

Anyone teaching that evolution is a theory
on par with the fantasy of "creation" should
be tossed in jail.

Not outrageous enough, lacks originality too. Take another run at it.

Ed T.

"Ed T" wrote in message
Not outrageous enough, lacks originality too. Take another run at it.

Ed T.


And cross-posting???

RichA wrote:

be tossed in jail. These religious, uneducted nitwits
need to be taught a lesson before they drag a section
of the United States back to the Middle Ages.

Too late!;-)

RichA wrote:
Sky and Telescope magazine's editor just produced
an editorial regarding the relegation of
evolution as some weak theory against
"creationalism" as some kind of fact.
I agree with them. But I'd go further;
Anyone teaching that evolution is a theory
on par with the fantasy of "creation" should
be tossed in jail. [...]

Jail? You're too kind.

As I posted here a year ago, check this URL:

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/

put together by a grant from the NSF and the Howard Hughes Foundation
(IIRC).

That site offers a basic course in the methods of science and the
mechanics
of evolution.

At our local college, we have a biology professor who considers
evolution an axiom, and flatly refuses to allow any contrary opinions in
his classes or assignments. Is scientific zealotry preferable to
religious zealotry? Fred Reed (an agnostic BTW) sums it up very well
with several columns he's written over the years:

http://www.fredoneverything.net/Evolution.shtml

http://www.fredoneverything.net/Religion.shtml

http://www.fredoneverything.net/Faith.shtml


Most print media these days are run by committees of elitists, and it's
sad to see S&T joining the ranks of magazines like Scientific American,
and Nature. At one time they were great publications that understood
their purpose. Now they're on a mission to fix societal problems because
the editors forgot their job descriptions, and they want more female
readership.

RichA wrote:

Sky and Telescope magazine's editor just produced
an editorial regarding the relegation of
evolution as some weak theory against
"creationalism" as some kind of fact.
I agree with them. But I'd go further;
Anyone teaching that evolution is a theory
on par with the fantasy of "creation" should
be tossed in jail. These religious, uneducted nitwits
need to be taught a lesson before they drag a section
of the United States back to the Middle Ages. There is
religious freedom in the United States, but there are
also laws against child abuse and warping a child's
mind so as to negatively effect them in later life
with that literalist, Christian mumbo-jumbo IS abuse.
The advent of home-schooling is another area that needs
to be looked at carefully. Guidelines as to who is
qualified to provide this to children should be put
in place.
-Rich

"Tim Killian" wrote in message
...
At our local college, we have a biology professor who considers evolution
an axiom, and flatly refuses to allow any contrary opinions in his classes
or assignments. Is scientific zealotry preferable to religious zealotry?
snip
In primary school we had a teacher who flatly stated that 3 + 3 = 6.
She would not allow any contradictory opinion.
She was firm but gentle.

On Sun, 06 Mar 2005 23:54:22 -0700, Tim Killian
wrote:

At our local college, we have a biology professor who considers
evolution an axiom, and flatly refuses to allow any contrary opinions in
his classes or assignments. Is scientific zealotry preferable to
religious zealotry?

Yes, if that choice has to be made because religion, barring any
real proof, is based on fantasy. Science is based mostly on evidence
and facts when it's done right and the theory of evolution was "done
correctly." But the choice need not be made anyway. Teach religion,
just don't pretend it has any claim to absolutism because none of it
can stand the test of proof. Only morons believe absolutely in the
Bible, Koran, whatever. Most have enough brains to realize those
books use metaphor and stories to get across positions of morality.
-Rich

A Rebumplican Bush Voter is lecturing us on the benefits of teaching
Evolution, what an occasion for laughter. You support a President who has
aborted stemcell research funding, expressly denied the reality of global
warming, is gleefully trashing the environment in expectation of The
Rapture, and last but not least building a fantasy-based propaganda system
the likes of which hasn't been seen for 60 years.

How do you reconcile supporting Evolution when you deny the logical
conclusion belief in it inevitably leads to, and support a political party
that is anti-Science ?

rms

T.T. wrote:
In primary school we had a teacher who flatly stated that 3 + 3 = 6.

I've been taught that 2 + 2 = 5, for extremely large values of 2. Was I
misled?