HELP! The lunatics are taking over the asylum

[russky joe]

CREATIONISM SPREADING IN AMERICA



In the boldest strike against the teaching of evolution in more than a decade, the school board of this one-stoplight farming town has tilted its textbooks against virtually the entire scientific establishment - and brought home a lesson from this month’s presidential election.



By mandating that ninth-grade biology teachers include "intelligent design" in their instruction, board members set a precedent last month. Never before has a school district decided to offer intelligent design, which suggests that only the action of a higher intelligence can explain the complexities of evolution. Moreover, say observers, it is a sign of what's to come.



Religious conservatives have battled against evolution theory in classrooms since the Scopes trial of 1925. Now, they are finding fresh purpose in the conservative resurgence so evident on Election Day, as well as in a new strategy of attacking evolution without mentioning God. The result is a handful of high-profile cases nationwide that challenge Darwin's place in the curriculum and presage a new offensive in America's culture war.



"We’re seeing a growing number of these cases," says Eugenie Scott, director of the National Center for Science Education in Oakland, Calif., a group that seeks to protect evolution education. "Certainly, with the greater confidence given to the religious right in the last election, we see no end in sight."



A poll by Gallup showed that 48% of Americans believe in creationism, 28% in evolution, with 10 having no opinion either way. 9% "leaned towards creationism", while5% "leaned towards" evolution.

[Sterling30]

But all the evidence forwarded to support evolution has been proven to be fraud.. That's what you call science???



Here's the proof..



nwcreation.net/evolutionfraud.html

[The Master68]

" But all the evidence forwarded to support evolution has been proven to be fraud.."



Yeah, unlike the proof that god created the world in 6 days...

--------------

When you argue with a fool, be sure he isn't similarly occupied...

--------------

Music - Organismo Cibernetico (Cybernetic Organism)

[russky joe]

"But all the evidence forwarded to support evolution has been proven to be fraud.. That's what you call science???



Here's the proof."



Are you yanking my chain here, kid?

[Sterling30]

I'm not making any argument in favor of Creationism or whatever it's called, I'm just showing you that their very informed argument against Evolution is very strong.



When every bit of evidence forwarded to prove the faith of Evolution has been proven fraudulant and that that obviously those strongest supporters of this belief have no real faith in Evolution themselves, well, at least we know one side is wrong now don't we?

[Sloppy Chimbo]

What Would Stalin Do?



1. Preach peace, love and understanding.



2. Turn the other cheek



3. Love his enemies



4. Kill a bunch of innocent folks

[russky joe]

"I'm not making any argument in favor of Creationism or whatever it's called, I'm just showing you that their very informed argument against Evolution is very strong.



When every bit of evidence forwarded to prove the faith of Evolution has been proven fraudulant and that that obviously those strongest supporters of this belief have no real faith in Evolution themselves, well, at least we know one side is wrong now don't we?"



Are you frickin' kidding me? The evidence for evolution is littered all over the place. Of course there's been frauds - we don't know who set them up and why, maybe a bit of attempted discrediting going on by the religious nutballs? And there's been a few false claims. But all the evidence points towards evolution being a scientific fact.



That article you linked to is total nutball bullshit.



Read this.



home.earthlink.net/~markl...onism.html

[russky joe]

In defence of evolution - The scientific viewpoint



Mike Owen, Imprint staff



In 1924, Mr. Scopes, a high school teacher, went on trial for teaching subversive and immoral subjects in class. His name was besmirched, and the subject he had been teaching dissapeared from textbooks across the continent. Evolution has been fighting an uphill battle ever since.



The "wild" theory of evolution has been around for nearly 200 years now, yet it just never seems to be fully accepted by the religious right of the world. Creationism, the Christian alternative to evolution for those who follow the Bible to the letter, has been gaining considerable momentum in modern society.



This would be little more than an irritation to the scientifically-minded were it not for the fact that some creationists are very aggressive about spreading their views. This is especially troubling when people decide that their religious views should be the only views being taught in public schools, as many are suggesting. A total lack of critical thinking combined with a fanatical drive to promote creationism has made these groups blind to any other possibilities. As a result, innacurate critiques of evolution abound and confuse the issues of the debate.



A solid look at evolution is needed to address the varied criticisms often put forward. What exactly is meant by evolution? What are the main areas of evolution that would need to be proven for it to be accepted as a valid theory?



The first thing to be proven is extinction, a relatively simple task. Anyone would agree that the dinosaurs, as a group, are strikingly absent from the world. Along with those are obvious choices like the carrier pigeon and the dodo bird. The fact that they were killed off by humans has no bearing on the question - humans are part of the environment, no matter how poorly we treat it.



Next, we have to have a look at organisms and see if variations or mutations can be seen in populations, and if these variations ever change in frequency in a population. The mosquito is a great example of variation, and we can see it by having a look at mosquitoes around the time when DDT was becoming the dominant insecticide in North America. The mosquitoes of the time seemed completely vulnerable to DDT, and over two years of vigorous spraying, the population dropped drastically. This was an intense selective pressure - any mosquitoes that were vulnerable to DDT died off. However, there were some with a generic variation that made them resistant to DDT.



These few mutants had never comprised a major part of the mosquito population before, as there was no pressure that acted against the non-mutants. With the DDT in place, most mosquitoes that were not resistant died off, and the resistant mosquitoes multiplied so quickly that the mosquito population was soon as high as ever, and DDT was all but useless.



Once the selective pressure, DDT, was used on the insect population, the mutation became "fixed." This is the term used to indicate that the level of the mutation went to a frequency of 100 per cent or very near it. After all of this spraying, the non-resistant strains were the odd ones out, but the variation likely remained.



How did these variations arise in the mosquito population? Mutations are a relatively common occurrence in the grand scheme of things. The problem with them is that in higher organisms, mutations are generally too serious to allow the organism to live. But, they still exist. These mutations can be seen in the simple variation in the human population, or in the more pronounced variations. For example, albinos, Down syndrome patients or victims of other diseases caused by unusual variations in the human genome. This does not mean that every person with sickle cell anemia is a mutant, this simply means that their genes were at some point very far back in the gene pool altered in some way.



Mutations can be easily provoked in some organisms. Normal genetic engineering projects use mutations to identify specific genes in microorganisms. In heavily polluted lakes, some larger organisms like frogs and toads have mutated to the extent that they are barely recognizable as members of their original species.



It can safely be said that there are variations in the normal population of the planet. These variations can increase or decrease over time, and sometimes, as in the case of the dinosaurs, when sufficient variation is lacking, huge groups of organisms can die out.



Now we come to the real kicker of a question - have new species of organisms arisen in the past, and can we prove this? This is a difficult area to probe, because it's actually quite difficult to prove. After all, the timeframes involved for speciation are in the millions to hundreds of millions of years. Not only that, but we still have work to do on classifying the organisms that are on the planet right now.



Happily, the fossil record is an ideal source of information on the history of life on this planet. It is very difficult to look credible in scientific circles denying the fact that the fossil record provides at least some sort of record of life. The evidence is difficult to dimiss without some impressive leaps of logic.



If we look at and date sediments from the soil, we can get an idea of what organisms were alive back in history from the fossils they contain. Humans can be taken as a good example of this phenomenon. Looking in the fossil record, it is apparent that there is no record of a human, or anything similar to a human before approximately 4.1 million years ago. It seems safe to assume that humans have arisen since then, but for those who can't appreciate this, there is a fossil record which illustrates the evolution of the homonids from Australopithecus anafarensis to Homo sapiens sapiens.



It's quite true that these fossils are not perfect - we don't have every step in the evolution from our ancestors to modern humans, but it follows an obvious pattern. The pattern is like a series of numbers. Seeing 1-2-3-4- -6-7, it seems safe to assume that the missing number is a five. You can't strictly prove it, but it follows common logic.



It's a shame that in this day and age there are still science students who graduate refusing to believe the theory that so elegantly explains the diversity of life on this planet. It's even more of a shame that they can't come up with a better cure all than "God did it." And worst of all, it's a shame these people might have a say in how children, even your children, are educated. I'd want better for my children.

[DreamTone7]

joe - "...we don't know who set them up and why..."



Not without at least asking the people who created the fraud to begin with, but we can certainly make some educated guesses now, can't we.



Did animals evolve? Certainly. But Darwin's theory has NEVER been able to supply a reasonable and scientific cause for evolution to occur. It only makes scientific sense that we consider it a possibility that there is an outside force in action that we cannot scientifically confirm (or deny, for that matter) the existance of. Darwin studied over 3,000 species and never found one in the process of evolving. There are no fossils to support evolution, either. You would think that we would have found by now some fish that have legs, or something along that line. We have not. Somebody plays "Mr. Potatohead" with creatures...three guesses as to who it is, and the first two don't count.

[russky joe]

"an outside force in action that we cannot scientifically confirm (or deny, for that matter)"



What a bunch of lying frickin' nutjobs.



Claim something exists then say it's possible 'coz it can't be disproven. Of course it can't be disproven you asshole. That's why it was invented in the frickin' first place, so it could 'live forever' in the minds of stupid believers.



Nothing exists unless evidence of its existence can be proven by the five senses. And don't give me this 'sixth sense ' baloney - that was invented by people who had taken leave of the first five.



At least evolutionists had the honesty to base their ideas in the real world and leave themselves open to falsification. The internal process of natural selection and species mutation is plain for all to see, in the present and in the past by the fossil record. Only religious nutjobs deny it. Like you for instance.



Fish with legs. That just shows how dumb you are and how little you know about science. The frickin' creature wouldn't stay like a fish and sprout frickin' legs, ya dumbo, the whole body changed to become a lan-dweller. It's perfectly plain that today's amphibians and other creatures like them were the link between the two. You never seen a frickin' turtle? And we've just found the fossils of another hominid on an island in the Indian Ocean, to show another link between ape and man.



You're holding back the future, you're a frickin' impediment to progress and reason. The world is being driven back into the dark ages coz of assholes like you. Fish with legs. Frickin' ada. What a dork.

[Sterling30]

"I'm not making any argument in favor of Creationism or whatever it's called, I'm just showing you that their very informed argument against Evolution is very strong.



When every bit of evidence forwarded to prove the faith of Evolution has been proven fraudulant and that that obviously those strongest supporters of this belief have no real faith in Evolution themselves, well, at least we know one side is wrong now don't we?"



Are you frickin' kidding me? The evidence for evolution is littered all over the place. Of course there's been frauds - we don't know who set them up and why, maybe a bit of attempted discrediting going on by the religious nutballs? And there's been a few false claims. But all the evidence points towards evolution being a scientific fact.



That article you linked to is total nutball bullshit.





Try hitting the link this time..., that was no article at all but rather a page containg links to 20+ different sites that disprove all of Evolutionist claims by demonstrating how their so-called evidence to prove their theories have all been fraudulantly manufactured..



nwcreation.net/evolutionfraud.html

Edited by: Sterling30 at: 12/5/04 20:33

[russky joe]

"Try hitting the link this time..., that was no article at all but rather a page containg links to 20+ different sites that disprove all of Evolutionist claims by demonstrating how their so-called evidence to prove their theories have all been fraudulantly manufactured."



Look, kid, when I say I hit the frickin' link I hit the link, OK?



What I saw was a short article at the top of a bunch of links. The article was bullshit and I clicked a few of the links at random - guess where they led, buttercup? To sites put up by christian and islamic fundies. Just a coincidence that they were mostly from Texas, Alabama and other fundie states in Jesusland, I suppose?



Evolution is the strongest theory we have. Creationism is superstitious bullshit with as much credibility as santa claus and the tooth fairy. Read this to find out why. The American Atheist site has a lot of other good articles too.



www.atheists.org/evolutio...ption.html

[russky joe]

Anyway, screw this. I'm bored to death talking to the same stupid fundies all the time. I might join up here in a few days.



atheistanon.proboards18.com/index.cgi



It has over 280 members, which is about 270 more than this dump, and, guess what, most of 'em talk sense.

[Seismic Anamoly]

You couldn't possibly do me a higher honor, Cossuck.



GREAT knowing without a doubt I have gotten so DEEP under your soft, pale, effeminate skin and into your head.



Appreciate the confirmation!



Think I'll have me a cold one, Babee.

[DreamTone7]

joe - "Nothing exists unless evidence of its existence can be proven by the five senses."



Very short-sighted and arrogant statement. Of course there are things that exist that can't be confirmed by our senses...and much more than that, as we simply as yet don't know where to look (or smell/touch/taste/etc). By your arguement, the dark side of the moon did not exist at one point simply because we hadn't seen it yet! However, I will admit, that for those who deny the existance of a God, it becomes very comfortable (and convenient) to deny the existance of everything that they do not know about/cannot completely comprehend. Unfortunately for those people, the odds are that there are species on other far distant planets that would disagree with him, as they are most likely in posession of knowledge of things that we do not yet know about. Oh, but wait, you don't believe in their existance either.



Esteemed scientists the world over, at one point in history, claimed that the world was flat. They have since been proven wrong...as I firmly believe that you will be too one day, joe.