Missouri seeks to ban Evolutionism

[WolvenBear]

A Republican Legislator today said that he was seeking to ban Evolution from schools. "Evolution is a theory and is completely unproven, therefore it should not be taught in schools, until it is fact." If his law takes effect, teachers would be banned from talking about evolutionary theory or Darwin. Which is just silly, because even if Evolution could somehow be proved wrong, Darwin is still an important part of scientific history. And it's assinine to remove something from the curriculum just because it's only theory. Theory of Relativity anyone?

[GunCrave]

Personally, I don't think it should be banned. The reason being most of evolution can be falsified or not. I do think they should ban abiogenesis, however, that (like ID or creationism) cannot be proven. So it has no reason in a place of absolutes (i.e. science class).

[ironmaiden233]

i fucking hate the south

[Begoner]

I guess we regressed to 1925-- this is pathetic. Maybe we should ban science, because anything scientific is "just a theory." Idiots.

[ironmaiden233]

we should ban rednecks from reproduceing.

[MoralLibertarian]

At 3/17/06 03:21 PM, ironmaiden233 wrote: i fucking hate the south

Missouri's in the midwest, imbecile.

[ironmaiden233]

o i thought it was missippi

[SadisticSuburbanite]

At 3/17/06 03:36 PM, MoralLibertarian wrote: Missouri's in the midwest, imbecile.

Missouri could be considered part of the South. It was a slave state before the Emancipation and it sent unofficial representatives to the Confederate Congress and supplied to troops to the Confederate Army, just like Kentucky. Just look at the Rebel Flag. It has 13 stars instead of 11. The extra two stars are meant to include Missouri and Kentucky, even though they never OFFICIALLY joined the Confederacy.

[ReiperX]

I would like to see a source on this, I do see the supreme court getting involved in this though.

[WolvenBear]

At 3/17/06 03:21 PM, ironmaiden233 wrote: i fucking hate the south

Missouri's the Midwest thank you very much.

At 3/17/06 03:30 PM, Begoner wrote: I guess we regressed to 1925-- this is pathetic. Maybe we should ban science, because anything scientific is "just a theory." Idiots.

Well to be fair, our governor is NOT behind this (at least not yet), and he's a Republican. And not everything scientific is "just theory".

At 3/17/06 03:53 PM, SadisticSuburbanite wrote: Missouri could be considered part of the South. It was a slave state before the Emancipation and it sent unofficial representatives to the Confederate Congress and supplied to troops to the Confederate Army, just like Kentucky. Just look at the Rebel Flag. It has 13 stars instead of 11. The extra two stars are meant to include Missouri and Kentucky, even though they never OFFICIALLY joined the Confederacy.

It was called the Missouri compromise. Missouri was actually above the line of demarcation for slavery. And Missouri also supplied troops unofficially for the North too. Brothers would join different armies. Southerners went north, Northeners went South. And the mid states did their best to stay nuetral.

At 3/17/06 06:30 PM, ReiperX wrote: I would like to see a source on this, I do see the supreme court getting involved in this though.

It should be up on the web by seven. It was just on the news at 2. And I see them getting involved too, even though it's not their place to.

[Shadic-1]

This is the reason why I hate conservatives in general. I could slience this moron in a debate with just a bit of sarcasm using his logic. (when I said the thing about hating conservatives, it's not all of you, just guys like this until you prove you aren't like him.)

At 3/17/06 03:36 PM, MoralLibertarian wrote: Missouri's in the midwest, imbecile.

Missouri was part of the confederacy, (much more simply) dumbass.

[Begoner]

Well to be fair, our governor is NOT behind this (at least not yet), and he's a Republican. And not everything scientific is "just theory".

I was referring to whichever legislator was behind this bill. And by the definition of science, nothing can be proven. Everything scientific is a theory (laws are special types of theories, but theories nonetheless) because there might be new evidence that disproves a theory. This is true of any theory, even gravity. Maybe one day, things will start to float upwards and we'll have to revise the theory of gravity. Who knows?

It was called the Missouri compromise. Missouri was actually above the line of demarcation for slavery.

It was above the line of demarcation, but it still had slaves. Part of the compromise said that the only state above 30'36 (or something like that) that could have slaves was Missouri. Anyway, geographically it is more to the north.

[Elfer]

DOWN WITH PHYSICS

[WolvenBear]

At 3/17/06 07:21 PM, -Shadic- wrote: Missouri was part of the confederacy, (much more simply) dumbass.

Well, not only does that not make him incorrect. It is also wrong. Missouri never officially joined the confederacy. Just like Kentucky.

At 3/17/06 07:25 PM, Begoner wrote: I was referring to whichever legislator was behind this bill. And by the definition of science, nothing can be proven. Everything scientific is a theory (laws are special types of theories, but theories nonetheless) because there might be new evidence that disproves a theory. This is true of any theory, even gravity. Maybe one day, things will start to float upwards and we'll have to revise the theory of gravity. Who knows?

No, it's not true that it can't go beyond "theory". Things can be scientifically proven. Laws are no longer theories. They are proven rules. That's why gravity isn't taught as a "theory", because it isn't one. If things begin to "float upwards" that in no way disproves gravity. It simply means the gravitational force of the Earth has changed. A measurement can change. Gravity can increase or decrease. But gravity isn't a theory. Nothing can be proven in science....what poppycock.

[TrickySoup]

Goddammit is Missouri stupid.

[WolvenBear]

At 3/17/06 10:49 PM, I_AM_PIRATE wrote: Goddammit is Missouri stupid.

Is NY? Frigging idiot. Just because one guy wants to do this, the ENTIRE state must be stupid. Go stick a toilet brush in your mouth and think about what you did.

[Shifty55]

At 3/17/06 03:21 PM, ironmaiden233 wrote: i fucking hate the south

Missouri isnt the south.

[ReiperX]

At 3/17/06 07:15 PM, WolvenBear wrote:

At 3/17/06 06:30 PM, ReiperX wrote: I would like to see a source on this, I do see the supreme court getting involved in this though.

It should be up on the web by seven. It was just on the news at 2. And I see them getting involved too, even though it's not their place to.

I think it is, the government should step in when things like this are brought up. It not only makes a laughing stock of our education system, it also makes more things not taught in school, so more people not knowing things like that. One vital role in the government is helping its citizens to a better quality of living, better education helps a better quality of living which means the people are probally making more money to pay more taxes towards the government.

[subpar]

At 3/17/06 02:03 PM, WolvenBear wrote: A Republican Legislator today said that he was seeking to ban Evolution from schools. "Evolution is a theory and is completely unproven, therefore it should not be taught in schools, until it is fact."

What the hell?

If we didn't teach things in school until they were "fact," we wouldn't be teaching very much. Lots of things in science are "theories" but that doesn't mean they aren't important. Besides, evolution will never be proven as a fact -- not because there isn't enough evidence, but because evolution takes millions of years. We don't have that long to observe it in humans, and proving that humans evolved is the only way to make the creationists shut the hell up.

... Well, whatever. This legislation will never pass. Nobody can be ignorant enough to ban evolution, in this day and age, simply because it's "a theory." Darwin is as important to science as Einstein. Even if the schools don't support the theory of evolution, they still have to teach students about the theory. Leaving it out would be like... oh, I don't know... neglecting to teach the Holocaust in a History class.

[Memorize]

If it was proven to be incorrect, then why would it be important?

Anyway, this is just another wacko giving his say.

[Dark-Apollyon]

Banning evolution would be stupid, because it's actually been proven that it exists, and isn't like creationism where the only proof is religious works and such. Creationism (at least in the bible I think) says earth existed about 6000 something years, while in fact it has been proved that there are things much more ancient than that. Basic primate humans are 2.2 million years old, and have changed to adapt the enviornment by evolution. And there's also Darwin, who is one of the biggest pioneers of evolutionism. They should keep him in curriculums and such, because he contributed a lot of life science to the world. Without him, we never would've known our closest animal relatives and why. Whoever came up with the idea to ban evolutionism is a big fool.

[Memorize]

And this is where the misconception is!

People seem to think "oh it has support" means "oh it is fact".

At least know the damn difference.

[JoS]

There is more scientific data and support for Evolution then there is for ID.

[Bolo]

I think it stands to reason that Missouri should be considered "in the south"—it was a slave state for much of its existance, you know...

[FinalFantasyFencer]

Isn't science just a bunch of theories & plus,people should know about this stuff,wether it's theory on not!

[FinalFantasyFencer]

We can drop wehther or not Missouri is in the south or not, the fact that they're trying to ban Darwin is more important

[LmanofMGS3]

no theory is proven, otherwise it would be a "Law." evolution has been proven, not neccesarily Darwins theory of human evolution, but microevolution, to my knowledge can not possibly be denied. organisms adapt to their surroundings, or they evolve. the republican in question doesnt seem very edjumacated.

[FinalFantasyFencer]

At 3/18/06 01:46 AM, jellofan7 wrote: I think it stands to reason that Missouri should be considered "in the south"—it was a slave state for much of its existance, you know...

So? people in the north had slaves too, just in less amounts

[FinalFantasyFencer]

At 3/18/06 02:12 AM, LmanofMGS3 wrote: no theory is proven, otherwise it would be a "Law." evolution has been proven, not neccesarily Darwins theory of human evolution, but microevolution, to my knowledge can not possibly be denied. organisms adapt to their surroundings, or they evolve. the republican in question doesnt seem very edjumacated.

Damn straight!

[Jose]

They should also ban teaching the theory of gravity in schools, because gravity isn't a proven scientific fact. While they are at it, they should take away the theory of relitivity. I dare anyone on this forum to find me a scholarly article that supports ID. This fucking country is taking a turn for the worse.