Evolution in skool (the hidden facts) (Darwin, creation, godless, pagan)

[Sunstone]

Originally Posted by MysticSang'ha

But..........but.............but she's blond...............and she's skinny............and she has sass!

Hopefully, she'll soon also get proper medications in addition to blondness, skinnyness and sass.

[Booko]

Originally Posted by JoeCole1572

Now...i had learned the theory of evolution in bio class.....and wow....it cleared up a lot

Then the day came when i stumbled upon my sister's book titled, Godless by Ann Coulter,

the last three chapters were about evolution...It had facts disproving the theory...facts that should be tought at skool(i am too lazy to put in the "ch" so sorry if that offends you).

It had a lot about fossil records that disprove the theory.

Ann makes a great point.

I am just saying....I think we should be taught everything about the theory...because its just a theory...and will remain that way for a while...and disproving facts are a HUGE part of every theory.

Ann Coulter lacks any background in science, and if her "knowledge" in other areas is a guide, if that woman told me the sky was blue I would look out the window and see for myself.

I think that we should learn everything about evolution....or not learn it at all in skool.

I don't care if creationsm or anything else is not taught....just as long as the evolution THEORY is taught correctly.

They teach you the Bohr model of the atom in Chemistry too, and any chemist will tell you it's "wrong."

It would be better to say it's a "starting point." If we tried to teach the complete info on what we know about atomic structure in HS, you'd spend years there and come out with a college degree in Physical Chemistry.

Educationally speaking, does that make sense to you?

Because you're asking the same thing be done in biology class vis a vis evolutionary theory.

In a bio class, you only have time for the briefest overview. If you want to know more, major in Biology in college.

[JoeCole]

Many of you are asking for the evidence....well i have to say....I gave you the source

Originally Posted by JoeCole1572

Then the day came when i stumbled upon my sister's book titled, Godless by Ann Coulter,

Go to the library and take it out. The last three chapters are all about evolution.
I know the book is mostly about politics. BUT the last 3 chapters are all you need to know about things that disprove evolution.

If you wish to google it type in words like "pre-precambrian burst" or something along the lines of "fossil records disprove evolution"

I am aware that evolution is going on today...it is observed through bacteria and viruses and animals...but i don't think that we came from singled celled organisms....i mean come on....we are using a highly advanced system to argue this point. Monkeys can barley do anything with technology....let alone create it.

[Sunstone]

Three chapters "debunking" evolution written by a person who is not even qualified to wash test tubes in any reputable college lab does not constitute a refutation of evolution. If you want to try to refute evolution, first educate yourself about it. Really educate yourself about it. Go way beyond what they teach in High School. Then, after you have learned enough about evolution to talk knowledgeably about it, go ahead and refute away... if you can.

[Halcyon]

Originally Posted by JoeCole1572

Many of you are asking for the evidence....well i have to say....I gave you the source



Go to the library and take it out. The last three chapters are all about evolution.
I know the book is mostly about politics. BUT the last 3 chapters are all you need to know about things that disprove evolution.

If you wish to google it type in words like "pre-precambrian burst" or something along the lines of "fossil records disprove evolution"

I am aware that evolution is going on today...it is observed through bacteria and viruses and animals...but i don't think that we came from singled celled organisms....i mean come on....we are using a highly advanced system to argue this point. Monkeys can barley do anything with technology....let alone create it.

They have found fossil evidence for pre-cambrian evolution, how old is this book you've been reading?

So, you think it more likely that we were created in our current form from clay?

That God planted the fossilised remains of many different species of human and the ancestors of humans?

That DNA evidence showing how we are very closely related to chimpanzees, slightly less closely related to monkeys, less closey related to prosimians, and distantly related to invertebrates is all just coincidental?

[MysticSang'ha]

Here are a few excerpts from Coulter's book:


* Although they are Druids, liberals masquerade as rationalists, adopting a sneering tone of scientific sophistication, which is a little like being condescended to by a tarot card reader.

* Environmentalists want mass infanticide...

* A few years after oil drilling began in Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, a saboteur set off an explosion blowing a hole in the pipeline and releasing an estimated 550,000 gallons of oil. It was one of the most devastating environmental disasters in recent history. Six weeks later, all the birds were back. Birds are like rats - you couldn't get rid of them if you tried.

* The most important value to Liberals is destroying human life.

* These broads (the widows of 9/11 victims) are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by grief-arazzis. I've never seen people enjoying their husband's deaths so much.

* Most public schools are - at best - noting but expensive babysitting arrangements, helpfully keeping hoodlums off the streets during daylight hours. At worst they are criminal training labs, where teachers sexually abuse the children between drinking binges and acts of grand larceny.

* Actual science excites them (Liberals) only if it involves some sort of Nazi experimentation with human embryos.

* It's possible embryonic stem-cell research could find a cure for Alzheimer's disease someday only in the sense that it is possible that a biologist's toenail clippings could be used to find a cure for Alzheimer's someday. Liberals aren't demanding that taxpayer's money be used for research on toenail clippings: that would not advance their governing principle, which is to always kill human life (unless the human life being killed is likely to fly a plane into American skyscrapers, in which case, it is wrong to kill it).

* Even when Liberals are trying to show their moderate, country-music loving side by claiming to oppose having sex with the family dog, they can't formulate a logical argument to explain why not.




It's a shame that her arguments she has set forth against evolution will be taken just as seriously as the above statements. I did pick up a copy of the book at KMart yesterday when I was shopping for my son's school supplies, and read a couple of chapters (the ones suggested by the OP, too), and put it down because there was nothing there besides mindless blather.




Peace,
Mystic

[Sunstone]

Originally Posted by MysticSang'ha

Here are a few excerpts from Coulter's book:


* Although they are Druids, liberals masquerade as rationalists, adopting a sneering tone of scientific sophistication, which is a little like being condescended to by a tarot card reader.

* Environmentalists want mass infanticide...

* A few years after oil drilling began in Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, a saboteur set off an explosion blowing a hole in the pipeline and releasing an estimated 550,000 gallons of oil. It was one of the most devastating environmental disasters in recent history. Six weeks later, all the birds were back. Birds are like rats - you couldn't get rid of them if you tried.

* The most important value to Liberals is destroying human life.

* These broads (the widows of 9/11 victims) are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by grief-arazzis. I've never seen people enjoying their husband's deaths so much.

* Most public schools are - at best - noting but expensive babysitting arrangements, helpfully keeping hoodlums off the streets during daylight hours. At worst they are criminal training labs, where teachers sexually abuse the children between drinking binges and acts of grand larceny.

* Actual science excites them (Liberals) only if it involves some sort of Nazi experimentation with human embryos.

* It's possible embryonic stem-cell research could find a cure for Alzheimer's disease someday only in the sense that it is possible that a biologist's toenail clippings could be used to find a cure for Alzheimer's someday. Liberals aren't demanding that taxpayer's money be used for research on toenail clippings: that would not advance their governing principle, which is to always kill human life (unless the human life being killed is likely to fly a plane into American skyscrapers, in which case, it is wrong to kill it).

* Even when Liberals are trying to show their moderate, country-music loving side by claiming to oppose having sex with the family dog, they can't formulate a logical argument to explain why not.




It's a shame that her arguments she has set forth against evolution will be taken just as seriously as the above statements. I did pick up a copy of the book at KMart yesterday when I was shopping for my son's school supplies, and read a couple of chapters (the ones suggested by the OP, too), and put it down because there was nothing there besides mindless blather.




Peace,
Mystic

In all seriousness, if Ann Coulter was a poster on RF, she'd get herself banned for multiple violations of our rule against rude, insulting, or inflammatory posts. She's pathetic.

[ikitikitembo]

Calling it the theory of evolution is just like saying the theory of photosynthesis.

Evolution is a theory but not in the sense your putting it in.

The only question about evolution is its mechanisms, not whether it occurs.