Why is Georgia a f****ed up state?

[rottwylor]

http://www.cnn.com/2004/EDUCATION/01/30/striking.evolution.ap/index.html

[The Germanator]

That's stupid...there's no point. You're still teaching the same concepts, but just not using one word. Ridiculous.

[Happydude]

It's stupid. It's like teaching gravity without using the word gravity.



what he said...

[Professor S]

If this goes through and I lived in Georgia with my kids, I would move out of state. Its about time we all woke up and realized that whether we believe in God or not, evolution is the way it is.

Accept it or get out of the way. I will not let ignorant bible beating jackasses to affect the education of my kids.

[Vampyr]

:rofl:

This is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard.

Glad I dont live in Georgia.

[rottwylor]

If this goes through and I lived in Georgia with my kids, I would move out of state. Its about time we all woke up and realized that whether we believe in God or not, evolution is the way it is.

Accept it or get out of the way. I will not let ignorant bible beating jackasses to affect the education of my kids.

I think I just fell in love with you... you're so... FORCEFULL and DIRECT! I think the bible bangers that are complaining about evolution should just homeschool thier children... far away.. on an island... with no return boats and no tools to make any.

[TheSlyMoogle]

Too much evidence supports evolution and all that. Creationist theories are all really unimaginable. It's just more believable that everything started out as single-celled organisms who eventually evolved into things we see today.

[rottwylor]

Well it's sort of hard for me to understand that mentality since I don't quite get how they can argue with science. Creationists believe that the earth was created only a few thousand years ago, yet they have no explanation for the dinosaurs or the early hominids. And the problem is you can't really argue with them because they're willing to refute what science has proven and instead just trust completely in their faith--which of course has no foundation in fact and is entirely heresay.

I've been through this with my neighbor, and he honestly believes that science is wrong and that the Bible is the only truth. So I just don't argue with him because any time he can't explain his own side of the discussion, he simply says, "Well, Christopher, I know in my heart that what the Lord tells me is true, and that's what faith is all about. Believing in God without the need for proof or justification."

[The Germanator]

Well, the problem here isn't that they aren't teaching evolution, they just aren't calling it evolution. It is stupid as hell, but it's better than them ignoring evolution totally.

[Kitana85]

Indeed, like what Germinator said, its better than ignoring it. My friends from Tennessee (they have since moved north) told me that there neither is taught in schools. It creates so much disagreement there, that they figure that parents can figure it out.

the change of names is stupid and no one is happy this way... then again, no one is ever happy

[Perfect Stu]

leavin on a midnight train to Georgia.../sings

*walks into random Georgia school, spraypainting lockers "EVOLUTION"*

[Professor S]

Well, the problem here isn't that they aren't teaching evolution, they just aren't calling it evolution. It is stupid as hell, but it's better than them ignoring evolution totally.

My concern is that if all they are doing is changing the name, then whats the point?

I know what the point is. The point is to slowly have it removed completely. If someone has a problem with the name evolution, then its pretty safe to say that they have a problem with the entire theory of evolution. If a name can be changed, why can't an entire curriculum follow in short order?

This, my friends, would only be the beginning.

Also, ignoring evolution and creation is just a way to passify weak minded biblical literalists. There are plenty of ways to work evolution into a Christian lifestyle.

Example: God created the world/universe in 7 days... well how long is a day to God? There was no concept of time as the ay we measure time is a creation of man.

Adam and Eve: A parable that people want to take literally. Its a story of man lost his way through paradise by defying the will of God. A lesson to live life by, not a literal history that means that we are all inbred hicks.

[Happydude]

i wonder if anyone there has ever seent eh move 'Evolution'

[rottwylor]

Lets get rid of the word "gravity" and use "mysterious mystical force holds us on the planet"

[Jonbo298]

If evolution is not to be said, eventually it will be banned as a curriculum teaching (or however you want to phrase it). If it does happen eventually where any teaching of Biological Chances or Evolution is flat out banned from teaching, then future children won't know the ideas of where we came from. This is like us calling French Fries "Freedom Fries". No wonder america is getting dumber.....

[rottwylor]

Well... they will replace Biological Chances and Evolution with Adam and Eve. Thats what will happen. I highly doubt that this will pass... but it's really annoying that it is happening. Just because some parents don't want their children to grow up with a proper education, doesn't mean that every child should be subjected to the same ideas. It's just rediculous. What if the same parents decide that they don't want thier children to learn about dinosaurs, because they weren't in the bible... WHEN DOES THE INSANITY STOP!!

[Ginkasa]

Although I myself am a creationist, I realize that not everyone is and I accept that. I also realize that school is not a place that is meant to impose beliefs on children, but educate them in the ways of the world.

Thus, I can kind of understand the rational behind this.

It doesn't make it any less stupid.

Banning either creationism or evolutionism (or the names of them) is not the way to go. Schools need to teach both theories and let the students decide. There should be no censoring on either side.

My Biology teacher last year was (is) a very devout Christian, and he didn't hide it. He did, however, teach evolution although he said himself he didn't believe it. He allowed the students themselves to make the choice without trying to impress either theory more than the other.

I can see the good intentions behind banning "evolution," but intentions aren't everything.

Besides, as people have already said, it does nothing. The actual word used means nothing if the definition is the same.


*shrugs and walks away*

[rottwylor]

Well... I can respect people for believing in creation over evolution. So I won't say you're wrong for believing in that. However, not every religion is consistant with one another on creation, so I don't think it's wise to bring religion, and religious beliefs into the school system. That would just upset people more. It's just way more touchy to do than it is science. Creation isn't proven, god hasn't been proven. Science is a proven thing. Dinosaurs, early hominds, animals evolving.. It's just a proven fact that evolution exists. Biological Chances I don't think is accurate enough to explain evolution. Biological Chances should be reserved for things like a sudden mutation in a species or conjoined twins. Evolution is a constant ongoing process... we're evolving now... slowly but surely. We don't have the same features we did 10,000 years ago. Our features are different from cro-magnon man and neanderthals. Taller, we walk more upright, less body hair, smaller teeth, etc. It's all part of evolving. So to say that creation and evolution should both be taught, I think would cause a lot more problems. Considering evolution is proven and creation isn't. I think creation should be taught at home or in the church, and to take the word evolution out because it's a "buzzword" and to replace it with a phrase like "biological chance" is ignorant. We are truly dumbing down america with all this PC crap.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/EDUCATION/01/30/georgia.evolution/index.html

Ok...I'm rambling, I'll probobly come back and edit this later as I'm trying to get out of the office... I hope my point is coming across, lol

[Ginkasa]

Obviously they shouldn't get into specific religions when talking about creationism. Just the idea that a divine being created us.

And it is not a "proven fact" that evolution exists. There are holes in it, such as the infamous missing link and the whole "if life can only come from pre-existing life, how did the first living thing come into being?" and all that. Besides, I don't see how some strange scientist whom you've never, and will never, meet is more trustworthy than the Bible or a priest. Because some other guy you've never met says he is?

Anyway, that wasn't the point of my first post. The point was that if they're going to go through the trouble of being politically correct, they should teach both theories and allow students to choose rather than censoring or banning either side and forcing one view over another.


*shrugs and walks away*

[Stonecutter]

I will not let ignorant bible beating jackasses to affect the education of my kids.


Yet you're going to vote for Bush in 2004.........................................................................

[One Winged Angel]

Even though I believe in Christianity... evolution can be accepted. Time is of no element to god.

What I'm saying is a million years could easily equal 7 days to god. The ****ing hicks dont seem to grasp that concept yet.

[GameMaster]

Yeah, I was reading this at school today, it definatley backs up my stereotype of Georgia people.

[Hero2]

I hate those kinds of people they should die a horrable death them and the people who want to ban video games bastards all of them.

[rottwylor]

Obviously they shouldn't get into specific religions when talking about creationism. Just the idea that a divine being created us.

And it is not a "proven fact" that evolution exists. There are holes in it, such as the infamous missing link and the whole "if life can only come from pre-existing life, how did the first living thing come into being?" and all that. Besides, I don't see how some strange scientist whom you've never, and will never, meet is more trustworthy than the Bible or a priest. Because some other guy you've never met says he is?

Let me try to make crystal clear what is established beyond reasonable doubt, and what needs further study, about evolution. Evolution as a process that has always gone on in the history of the earth can be doubted only by those who are ignorant of the evidence or are resistant to evidence, owing to emotional blocks or to plain bigotry. By contrast, the mechanisms that bring evolution about certainly need study and clarification. There are no alternatives to evolution as history that can withstand critical examination. Yet we are constantly learning new and important facts about evolutionary mechanisms.

It is time for students of the evolutionary process, especially those who have been misquoted and used by the creationists, to state clearly that evolution is a fact, not theory, and that what is at issue within biology are questions of details of the process and the relative importance of different mechanisms of evolution. It is a fact that the earth with liquid water, is more than 3.6 billion years old. It is a fact that cellular life has been around for at least half of that period and that organized multicellular life is at least 800 million years old. It is a fact that major life forms now on earth were not at all represented in the past. There were no birds or mammals 250 million years ago. It is a fact that major life forms of the past are no longer living. There used to be dinosaurs and Pithecanthropus, and there are none now. It is a fact that all living forms come from previous living forms. Therefore, all present forms of life arose from ancestral forms that were different. Birds arose from nonbirds and humans from nonhumans. No person who pretends to any understanding of the natural world can deny these facts any more than she or he can deny that the earth is round, rotates on its axis, and revolves around the sun.

[One Winged Angel]

Obviously they shouldn't get into specific religions when talking about creationism. Just the idea that a divine being created us.

And it is not a "proven fact" that evolution exists. There are holes in it, such as the infamous missing link and the whole "if life can only come from pre-existing life, how did the first living thing come into being?" and all that. Besides, I don't see how some strange scientist whom you've never, and will never, meet is more trustworthy than the Bible or a priest. Because some other guy you've never met says he is?

Anyway, that wasn't the point of my first post. The point was that if they're going to go through the trouble of being politically correct, they should teach both theories and allow students to choose rather than censoring or banning either side and forcing one view over another.


*shrugs and walks away*

Actually, they theorized that the 1st signs of life on earth came from a lightening bolt.