We're very good at hiding it. Some of us even disguise ourselves as conservatives and declare that we are a hivemind, just to throw people off the scent.
Advertisement

by Normandium » Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:17 am

by Cosara » Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:17 am
Agymnum wrote:Cosara wrote:So you're advocating:
"We think this theory is correct SO WE WILL SHOVE IT DOWN THE THROATS OF CHILDREN!!!!"
We do it all the time with the theories of gravity, Newton's Laws of Motion, atomic theory, etc.
It seems like the only time it's not okay is evolutionary theory in biology. Why?

by Arglorand » Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:17 am

by Choronzon » Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:17 am
We just need to tell children the truth: We don't know how life began.
We need to give them both theories and let them chose.
I view this as a common sense approach.

by Ceannairceach » Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:17 am
Cosara wrote:Agymnum wrote:
We do it all the time with the theories of gravity, Newton's Laws of Motion, atomic theory, etc.
It seems like the only time it's not okay is evolutionary theory in biology. Why?
Gravity is correct. Laws of Motion are correct. The problem I have is alienating over 50% of the population by teaching an opposing belief in schools.

by Agymnum » Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:18 am
Cosara wrote:Agymnum wrote:
We do it all the time with the theories of gravity, Newton's Laws of Motion, atomic theory, etc.
It seems like the only time it's not okay is evolutionary theory in biology. Why?
Gravity is correct. Laws of Motion are correct. The problem I have is alienating over 50% of the population by teaching an opposing belief in schools.

by Cosara » Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:18 am

by Mavorpen » Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:18 am
Cosara wrote:Agymnum wrote:
We do it all the time with the theories of gravity, Newton's Laws of Motion, atomic theory, etc.
It seems like the only time it's not okay is evolutionary theory in biology. Why?
Gravity is correct. Laws of Motion are correct. The problem I have is alienating over 50% of the population by teaching an opposing belief in schools.

by Normandium » Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:18 am
Cosara wrote:Agymnum wrote:
We do it all the time with the theories of gravity, Newton's Laws of Motion, atomic theory, etc.
It seems like the only time it's not okay is evolutionary theory in biology. Why?
Gravity is correct. Laws of Motion are correct. The problem I have is alienating over 50% of the population by teaching an opposing belief in schools.

by Cosara » Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:19 am
Normandium wrote:Cosara wrote:Gravity is correct. Laws of Motion are correct. The problem I have is alienating over 50% of the population by teaching an opposing belief in schools.
Gravity, Motion, etc. are all theories, though.
And private schools force Christian belief on their kids, even quoting the bible in science classes.

by Sedikal » Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:19 am

by Mavorpen » Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:20 am

by Hurdegaryp » Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:20 am
Hurdegaryp wrote:Cosara wrote:So you're advocating:
"We think this theory is correct SO WE WILL SHOVE IT DOWN THE THROATS OF CHILDREN!!!!"
I see your point there, even though it's very, very wrong. Shoving things down the throats of children is the exclusive domain of religion and pedophiles, after all. However, your 'logic' is flawed. You would probably also be in favour of teaching that you cannot drown as long as your faith is strong, no matter how deep you sink. Doesn't mean it works.
CVT Temp wrote:I mean, we can actually create a mathematical definition for evolution in terms of the evolutionary algorithm and then write code to deal with abstract instances of evolution, which basically equates to mathematical proof that evolution works. All that remains is to show that biological systems replicate in such a way as to satisfy the minimal criteria required for evolution to apply to them, something which has already been adequately shown time and again. At this point, we've pretty much proven that not only can evolution happen, it pretty much must happen since it's basically impossible to prevent it from happening.

by The Steel Magnolia » Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:20 am

by Osterr » Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:21 am

by Agymnum » Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:21 am
Cosara wrote:The Foe List really makes this forum more peaceful.

by Choronzon » Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:21 am
Cosara wrote:Agymnum wrote:
We do it all the time with the theories of gravity, Newton's Laws of Motion, atomic theory, etc.
It seems like the only time it's not okay is evolutionary theory in biology. Why?
Gravity is correct. Laws of Motion are correct. The problem I have is alienating over 50% of the population by teaching an opposing belief in schools.

by Grand Britannia » Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:21 am
Normandium wrote:Cosara wrote:Gravity is correct. Laws of Motion are correct. The problem I have is alienating over 50% of the population by teaching an opposing belief in schools.
Gravity, Motion, etc. are all theories, though.
And private schools force Christian belief on their kids, even quoting the bible in science classes.

by Normandium » Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:21 am

by Choronzon » Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:22 am

by Agymnum » Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:22 am
The Steel Magnolia wrote:I'm assuming all the iterations of "Fuck, no!" have been brought out!
To be roundly ignored by the conservatives making about how liberals want to suppress them.

by Antic Master Fegelein » Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:22 am
Agymnum wrote:Cosara wrote:The Foe List really makes this forum more peaceful.
If you're going to block everyone who disagrees with you, why bother posting on here at all? This is a debate forum and you need an opposition to debate.
It's like if I just blocked every conservative, fascist, and Tea Party member on here. Would I be happier? Sure. Would I have a purpose to stick around? No.
The point of the Foe List is to block incessant douches who flame you instead of debating you. Fairly sure we're debating you on here.
Nanatsu no Tsuki wrote:Yes, you're to blame. For everything.

by Hurdegaryp » Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:22 am
CVT Temp wrote:I mean, we can actually create a mathematical definition for evolution in terms of the evolutionary algorithm and then write code to deal with abstract instances of evolution, which basically equates to mathematical proof that evolution works. All that remains is to show that biological systems replicate in such a way as to satisfy the minimal criteria required for evolution to apply to them, something which has already been adequately shown time and again. At this point, we've pretty much proven that not only can evolution happen, it pretty much must happen since it's basically impossible to prevent it from happening.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Australian rePublic, Empire of Donner land, Gun Manufacturers, I always choose the longest answer
Advertisement