Waco, TX vs. Bill Nye

http://www.thinkatheist.com/profiles/blogs/bill-nye-bood-in-texas-for

Quote :

"Bill Nye, the harmless children's edu-tainer known as "The Science Guy," managed to offend a select group of adults in Waco, Texas at a presentation, when he suggested that the moon does not emit light, but instead reflects the light of the sun."

That's nothing compared to Tennessee passing a law saying that science teachers must also teach creationism.

Madelchai wrote:

http://www.thinkatheist.com/profiles/blogs/bill-nye-bood-in-texas-for

Quote :

"Bill Nye, the harmless children's edu-tainer known as "The Science Guy," managed to offend a select group of adults in Waco, Texas at a presentation, when he suggested that the moon does not emit light, but instead reflects the light of the sun."

No way, people in Texas... wait, people in WACO texas were offended by common knowledge? thats so shocking and unexpected from texas or the south in general. These people should just go to fat ho get a burger and chill for a few minutes... Then again they'd probably end up at the other place around the corner, she doesn't seem to understand levity.

Ginger_Snaps wrote:

That's nothing compared to Tennessee passing a law saying that science teachers must also teach creationism.

Thats really not that bad, creationism is just as misunderstood as darwinism. For example on some sticky's. Darwinism doesn't say "we came from apes" as a lot claim but it does say "we evolved from an apre LIKE creature" and Creationism doesn't say "god did it" but it does say "random chaose left alone to accidently make mutations doesn't explain the vast variety of life on earth something must be guiding"...

I tend to believe both and look no farther than the human being in and of our self as proof of both. From conception to birth we view an exceptionaly fast version or evolution as cells divide and a body and organs form. But at the same time something intelegent is guiding this and it isn't simply random chaos, be it genes or dna or whatever is the driving force it has the blueprints to what its forming in it...

His name is Bill Nye "The Science Guy." What were these adults doing at this presentation if they knew he was going to speak in terms of science, but not specifically religious science? He even put in a point from the bible & the people still thought he was scoffing "God." Did they go because they thought he was going to be like he was on his show & talk in easy terms about how things are made & how the Earth works? I'm just confused at what these adults thought they were going to see/hear when they arrived.

endless dark wrote:

Ginger_Snaps wrote:

That's nothing compared to Tennessee passing a law saying that science teachers must also teach creationism.

Thats really not that bad, creationism is just as misunderstood as darwinism. For example on some sticky's. Darwinism doesn't say "we came from apes" as a lot claim but it does say "we evolved from an apre LIKE creature" and Creationism doesn't say "god did it" but it does say "random chaose left alone to accidently make mutations doesn't explain the vast variety of life on earth something must be guiding"...

I tend to believe both and look no farther than the human being in and of our self as proof of both. From conception to birth we view an exceptionaly fast version or evolution as cells divide and a body and organs form. But at the same time something intelegent is guiding this and it isn't simply random chaos, be it genes or dna or whatever is the driving force it has the blueprints to what its forming in it...

The reason why creationism does not belong in a science classroom is because you can not apply the scientific method to it and you cannot observe it (evolution on the other hand can be observed). Creationism is also religious because it focuses on Christian creationism and not the myths from other religions.

With religion edging further and further into standard curriculum, and ensuing arguments because of people offended by science, I'm really starting to feel like I should have been born about half a generation back. I never thought I'd see all this, and it makes me feel old, as though I don't belong in this time at all.

I am never having kids. I can't bring them into this. More power to those who do have kids; it's looking like an uphill battle out there.

^^ Good point, actually.

RedAngel wrote:

With religion edging further and further into standard curriculum, and ensuing arguments because of people offended by science, I'm really starting to feel like I should have been born about half a generation back. I never thought I'd see all this, and it makes me feel old, as though I don't belong in this time at all.

I am never having kids. I can't bring them into this. More power to those who do have kids; it's looking like an uphill battle out there.

Yup.

Ginger_Snaps wrote:

endless dark wrote:

Ginger_Snaps wrote:

That's nothing compared to Tennessee passing a law saying that science teachers must also teach creationism.

Thats really not that bad, creationism is just as misunderstood as darwinism. For example on some sticky's. Darwinism doesn't say "we came from apes" as a lot claim but it does say "we evolved from an apre LIKE creature" and Creationism doesn't say "god did it" but it does say "random chaose left alone to accidently make mutations doesn't explain the vast variety of life on earth something must be guiding"...

I tend to believe both and look no farther than the human being in and of our self as proof of both. From conception to birth we view an exceptionaly fast version or evolution as cells divide and a body and organs form. But at the same time something intelegent is guiding this and it isn't simply random chaos, be it genes or dna or whatever is the driving force it has the blueprints to what its forming in it...

The reason why creationism does not belong in a science classroom is because you can not apply the scientific method to it and you cannot observe it (evolution on the other hand can be observed). Creationism is also religious because it focuses on Christian creationism and not the myths from other religions.

Sadly people don't want to hear that, you know, truth. The idea of creation by design is based of nothing but speculation and hearsay, no factual evidence whatsoever. Very good point though, why don't we teach the Sumerian, Nordic, and Iroquoian creation myths in school then too.