It's Something All of Us in the West Have in Common.
Published on May 15, 2010 By Infidel In Religion

Albert Einstein once said, "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results".

Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97 (1968), was a United States Supreme Court case that invalidated an Arkansas statute that prohibited the teaching of human evolution in the public schools. The Court held that the First Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits a state from requiring, in the words of the majority opinion, "that teaching and learning must be tailored to the principles or prohibitions of any religious sect or dogma." The Supreme Court declared the Arkansas statute unconstitutional because it violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epperson_v._Arkansas

Daniel v. Waters was a 1975 legal case in which the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit struck down Tennessee's law regarding the teaching of "equal time" of evolution and creationism in public school science classes because it violated the Establishment clause of the US Constitution. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_v._Waters

Hendren et al. v. Campbell et al. was a 1977 ruling by an Indiana state superior court that the young-earth creationist textbook Biology: A Search For Order In Complexity, published by the Creation Research Society and promoted through the Institute for Creation Research, could not be used in Indiana public schools. The ruling declared: "The question is whether a text obviously designed to present only the view of Biblical Creationism in a favorable light is constitutionally acceptable in the public schools of Indiana. Two hundred years of constitutional government demand that the answer be no." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hendren_v._Campbell

McLean v. Arkansas Board of Education, 529 F. Supp. 1255, 1258-1264 (ED Ark. 1982), was a 1981 legal case in Arkansas which ruled that the Arkansas "Balanced Treatment for Creation-Science and Evolution-Science Act" (Act 590) was unconstitutional because it violated the establishment clause of the U.S. Constitution. The judge, William Overton, handed down his decision on January 5, 1982, giving a clear, specific definition of science as a basis for ruling that “creation science” is religion and is simply not science. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McLean_v._Arkansas

Edwards v. Aguillard, 482 U.S. 578 (1987) was a case heard by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1987 regarding creationism. The Court ruled that a Louisiana law requiring that creation science be taught in public schools along with evolution was unconstitutional, because the law was specifically intended to advance a particular religion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwards_v._Aguillard

Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District, et al. (400 F. Supp. 2d 707, Docket no. 4cv2688) was the first direct challenge brought in the United States federal courts against a public school district that required the presentation of intelligent design as an alternative to evolution as an "explanation of the origin of life."The plaintiffs successfully argued that intelligent design is a form of creationism, and that the school board policy thus violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District


Comments (Page 9)
14 PagesFirst 7 8 9 10 11  Last
on May 27, 2010

lula posts:

So you two have faith in evolution.

leauki posts:

No. I don't. Never had.

Of course you do...read your own statement....

leauki posts 74

Yes, our descendants were ape-like. We are ape-like too. In fact, we are apes. We are members of the family Hominidea which includes orangutans and of the sub-family Homininae which includes gorillas, chimpanzees, and us. I wouldn't be surprised if our common ancestor were similar to all four species named above. To us he would probably seem like an orangutan.

 

Your own statement of belief you descended from ape-like creatures proves you have undenial faith in evolution.

on May 27, 2010

lula posts:

All I ask is that Evolution theory not be indoctrinated to unwary school children as fact.

leauki posts:

Children have to learn science. Full stop.

Knock, knock....time to face reality, Leaki....admit it or not, believe it or not .....Evolution according to the textbook, web and dictionary definition is a make-believe story, being masqueraded as scientific theory and indoctrinated to unwary school children as fact.  

 

 

on May 27, 2010

We are standing before a very thick brick wall of willful ignorance, Leauki.  Because faith apparently requires it.  Up is down, black is white.  C'est la vie.

on May 27, 2010

I've seen some evidence that we were descended from apes: George W. Bush wiped bird crap off of his sleeve with his bare hand. All you have to do is look at the behavior of people sometimes and you'll start to see it.

We are standing before a very thick brick wall of willful ignorance, Leauki.  Because faith apparently requires it.  Up is down, black is white.  C'est la vie.

What can be said about someone who believes that the illogical is logical?

on May 27, 2010

Your own statement of belief you descended from ape-like creatures proves you have undenial faith in evolution.

No, I believe that because of the evidence I have seen.

I believe in G-d because of faith but I believe that (other) apes and we descend from the same animals because we look similar.

 

Knock, knock....time to face reality, Leaki....admit it or not, believe it or not .....Evolution according to the textbook, web and dictionary definition is a make-believe story, being masqueraded as scientific theory and indoctrinated to unwary school children as fact. 

Do you have any evidence for that claim?

Start with learning enough about evolution to be able to differentiate it from this Creationist construction where species "turn into" other species and animals appear out of thin air.

I recommend you read Richard Dawkins' books.

But your current ignorance is a disgrace.

You don't even know what evolution is yet you feel competent to judge it? What an arrogance!

 

I've seen some evidence that we were descended from apes: George W. Bush wiped bird crap off of his sleeve with his bare hand.

Bird crap is easier to clean off hands (requires just water) than off certain fabrics.

 

We are standing before a very thick brick wall of willful ignorance, Leauki.  Because faith apparently requires it.  Up is down, black is white.  C'est la vie.

Faith doesn't require ignorance.

I totally believe in studying and I believe that it is a duty for every Jew to learn as much about the world as possible.

I wasn't the best student in high school, but I at least understood what a scientific theory is and why it is never proven and why it is valuable to teach it even after it has been disproven. (Shouldt we teach children nothing about why we think rocks fall towards the ground just because all theories that explain it have been disproven?) In contrast to other theories, we have not yet found evidence that evolution is wrong. We found plenty of evidence that it is true. But even if we hadn't found any evidence that it is true, it would still be a valid theory until disproven.

Religion is a smart man’s admission that he cannot know everything. Religious fundamentalism is a stupid man’s admission that he thinks he knows enough. -- Moshe Wilkinson


on May 27, 2010

willful ignorance

I don't know how willful it really is.

I really think she honestly doesn't understand how science works.

Many people don't, but few are so vocal about wanting to put science right.

It's a general problem when people get their knowledge from dictionaries.

 

on May 27, 2010

Leauki




How is creationism any less tautological? How isn't it more tautological? All you have to support your claim is the propaganda put out by the church! Give me a trillion dollars and the technology to extend my life to at least 1100 years old, and I can provide proof that evolution happens. Could you say the same about creationism?





You are making several mistakes.

Creatioism is tautological, evolution isn't. Creationism cannot be disproven, evolution can (but hasn't been).

Evolution can already be observed, we do not need 1100 years for that. There is no need to prove evolution, there is only a need to disprove it. In 1100 years you might have a chance to observe something that disproves evolution. But 20 people who grow to be 60 each have the same chance, so we won't need the 1100 year methusalem to do it.

As for proving Creationism, it's simple. I gave instructions for an experiment here:

http://citizenleauki.joeuser.com/article/314483/Experimental_Creationism

Note that this would not actually "prove" Creationism either, since it's possible that G-d only created those fruit flies but not anything else. By demonstrating the mechanism, however, Creationism would be half-way towards becoming a scientific theory.

 

I think you misunderstood what I was saying. I don't see evolution as tautological at all, but I was resonding directly to the Ann Coulter quote, and was thus using her view on evolution. The 1100 years would be to use a base stock of one species and perform a long term experiment that separates the inital population into two distinctly different contained, self-sustaining environments. Ideally over that short a period, one would use a species with a rapid breeding cycle, but one with a 5 year birth to breeding age cycle would still provide at least 220 generations, which in theory would be enough to have enough genetic mutations to distinguish the two populations as different species.

on May 27, 2010

You don't even know what evolution is yet you feel competent to judge it? What an arrogance!

What Evolution is..is clearly defined in dictionaries, on the Internet and in biology textbooks.  And you claiming yourself as a descendant of ape-like creatures proves you believe this definition of evolution as true. Now, this claim of yours must be believed by faith because evolutionists have offered not one scintilla of factual evidence that you descended from apes.

On Evolutionist's word, you believe Evolution by faith.

 

 

 

on May 27, 2010

Doombringer90

I think you misunderstood what I was saying. I don't see evolution as tautological at all, but I was resonding directly to the Ann Coulter quote, and was thus using her view on evolution. The 1100 years would be to use a base stock of one species and perform a long term experiment that separates the inital population into two distinctly different contained, self-sustaining environments. Ideally over that short a period, one would use a species with a rapid breeding cycle, but one with a 5 year birth to breeding age cycle would still provide at least 220 generations, which in theory would be enough to have enough genetic mutations to distinguish the two populations as different species.

There is no evidence for Evolution here in this scenario.

Race formation is very well documented. All it requires is isolation of a part of a population. After a few generations, the isolated population will lose some of its genes and thus, as long as the isolation continues, it will be different in some features from the original population from which it was isolated.

This is merely a reduction in the gene pool and that does not get evolution. Evolution  means construction of new genes. It means an increase in the amount of genetic information not a reduction of it. Evolution means the emergence of a new species. Evolution means making new things, not more differences of what already exists.  Start with ape-kind, you'll end with ape-kind. human-kind....you will end with human-kind. Start with fruit flies...you will end with fruit flies.

   

 

on May 27, 2010

willful ignorance

Leauki posts:


I don't know how willful it really is.

I really think she honestly doesn't understand how science works.

You all think that a 150 year old make-believe story called evolution is science. I don't. I think evolution is a lie being masqueraded as science.  

All theories that purport to be scientific must be compared and tested with observations and experiments. That's been done over and over with ET and no true evidence has been found to support evolutionary theory. Rather, evidence from science itself, particularly in the molecular and genetic fields, conflicts with or contradicts ET. It's time for scientists to abandon ET.  

 

on May 27, 2010

I really think she honestly doesn't understand how science works.

lula appears to agree with you:

All theories that purport to be scientific must be compared and tested with observations and experiments. That's been done over and over with ET and no true evidence has been found to support evolutionary theory. Rather, evidence from science itself, particularly in the molecular and genetic fields, conflicts with or contradicts ET. It's time for scientists to abandon ET.

on May 27, 2010

lula, do you know why human babies grab onto a person's long hair? Because that's how baby apes hang onto their mothers.

on May 27, 2010

lula, do you know why human babies grab onto a person's long hair? Because that's how baby apes hang onto their mothers.

Thanks for proving that Evolution isn't even compatible with common sense.

on May 27, 2010

leauki posts:

No, I believe that because of the evidence I have seen. I believe in G-d because of faith but I believe that (other) apes and we descend from the same animals because we look similar.

You don't even know what evolution is yet you feel competent to judge it?

I judge, in fact, I condemn the big lie of evolution that over mythical millions of years man-kind evolved from slime through ape-like creatures to what he is today.  

In contrast to other theories, we have not yet found evidence that evolution is wrong. We found plenty of evidence that it is true.

What is the plenty of evidence that ape-evolved to-man evolution is true?  

on May 27, 2010

I judge, in fact, I condemn the big lie of evolution that over mythical millions of years man-kind evolved from slime through ape-like creatures to what he is today.

I think we can safely say 'willful' now.

14 PagesFirst 7 8 9 10 11  Last