Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Well there goes any Tennessean ever becoming a scientist ever again. Maybe they can turn the science departments of their universities into more seminaries, lord knows preachers contribute more to society that stupid scientists.
Seriously. Permitting a mere additional topic in high school debate will change the career path for all potential Tennessean scientists?
Gawd, that is hilarious..
Actually, the problem lies not with the duscussion but with the reaction TO the discussion.
If we present JudeoChristian Creationism along side Evolution, then we also have to present Hindu, Native American ( all of them ), Afrcan Tribe stories, Zorasterian, etc.
And you know what happens next?
And which creationism are we advocating to teach?
Native American? Christian? Buddhism?
A victory for freedom of thought and individualism in the school, and a stinging defeat for the secular mind police. We enjoy freedom of speech, not freedom from speech you find disagreeable.
'NASHVILLE, Tenn. -- A bill that encourages classroom debate over evolution will become law in Tennessee, despite a veto campaign mounted by scientists and civil libertarians who say it will reopen a decades-old controversy over teaching creationism to the state's schoolchildren.'
Tenn. governor allows evolution debate bill to become law
Imagine the lively debate and opening of minds which can now flourish in the previously flat-earther science rooms across Tenn, and hopefully the rest of America!
Science is about provable theories..
Oh gawd. Here we go again...
No, science is not about provable theories. It's about testable hypotheses
There's a very good reason for separation of Church and State. I don't want the State teaching my children about God. That's my job.
God said let there be light and BOOM there was light. And it expanded and it expanded into all of Creation setting into motion the processes by which God created life.
Science does NOT disprove God. It shows us how He did it.
Why do some folks believe that they, as humans, are not susceptible to the forces of the evolution process?
The fellow below is studying who are the most intelligent animals in the world. He has removed Tennessee from the running.
"Animals of many kinds are social; we find even distinct species living together; for example, some American monkeys; and united flocks of rooks, jackdaws and starlings...The most common mutual service in the higher animals is to warn one another of danger by the united senses of all... Social animals perform many little services for each other; horses nibble and cows lick each other for external parasites....Animals also render more important services to one another; thus wolves and some other beasts of prey hunt in packs, and aid one another in attacking their victims. Pelicans fish in concert. The Hamadryas baboons turn over stones to find insects, etc.; and when they come to a large one, as many as can stand around, turn it over together and share the booty. Social animals mutually defend each other. Bull bisons in North America, when there is danger, drive the cows and calves into the middle of the herd, while they defend the outside...." Charles Darwin
Science is about provable theories..
Oh gawd. Here we go again...
No, science is not about provable theories. It's about testable hypotheses
Sure. Like the testable hypothetical causality of the 'Big Bang.'
LOL
As you've been shown, ID is not a scientific theory, so if you want competing theories taught in science, that rules out ID.God said let there be light and BOOM there was light. And it expanded and it expanded into all of Creation setting into motion the processes by which God created life.
Science does NOT disprove God. It shows us how He did it.
I buy into that 'God the Master Programmer' logic. Anything else is stupid on its face, as Bill Gates illustrates:
DNA is like a computer program but far, far more advanced than any software ever created.
― Bill Gates, The Road Ahead
But to me, the issue is about the ability to have open debate on the topic and discuss the competing theories.
Oh gawd. Here we go again...
No, science is not about provable theories. It's about testable hypotheses
Sure. Like the testable hypothetical causality of the 'Big Bang.'
LOL
Yes, tests have been done.
I don't know if he has personally, but implicitly, it has been tested.Sure. Like the testable hypothetical causality of the 'Big Bang.'
LOL
Yes, tests have been done.
You have tested the pre-universe conditions necessating causality of 'The Big Bang'?
Read for comprehension.
As you've been shown, ID is not a scientific theorycompeting theories.
I don't know if he has personally, but implicitly, it has been tested.Yes, tests have been done.
You have tested the pre-universe conditions necessating causality of 'The Big Bang'?
Read for comprehension.
Why?
Obviously, the word implicitly confuses you.I don't know if he has personally, but implicitly, it has been tested.You have tested the pre-universe conditions necessating causality of 'The Big Bang'?
Read for comprehension.
Why?
Something of the universe can test conditions which existed before the universe actually came into existence?
Talk about faith-based.
L O L
ID is not scientific BY DEFINITION, idiot.As you've been shown, ID is not a scientific theory
Repeat it over and over until you convince yourself.
L O L
Obviously, the word implicitly confuses you.I don't know if he has personally, but implicitly, it has been tested.
Why?
Something of the universe can test conditions which existed before the universe actually came into existence?
Talk about faith-based.
L O L
But, by definition, ID is not scientific.Obviously, the word implicitly confuses you.Something of the universe can test conditions which existed before the universe actually came into existence?
Talk about faith-based.
L O L
Ah. By the same standard, ID has been tested implicitly.
But, by definition, ID is not scientific.Obviously, the word implicitly confuses you.
Ah. By the same standard, ID has been tested implicitly.
