Science and the south.
 

"There is virtually no scientific controversy among the overwhelming majority of researchers on the core facts of evolution and climate change, and these subjects should not be taught as if there were such a controversy. It is discouraging to see legislation that encourages teachers to help students 'critique' the 'scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses' of what are in fact well-established theories," said AAAS CEO Alan Leshner.


Teaching science in Tennessee may become more confusing now that an antievolution bill has been added to the state's statutes.


http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencein...tennessee.html

Should the Federal Goverment step in to stop this kind of religion based hocus pocus?

Fairytale believers hate it when science contradicts their dogmatic fantasies.

And the GOP knows it.

Dave

I think we need the wise and all knowing Feds to help those poor folks. Whether they want it or not. :p

The science of climate change?

Pete

Nah, screw those poor people. They did it to themselves, after all.
Besides, if not havin' a pot to piss in was good 'nough fer grandpappy,
it's good 'nough fer them, you damn yankee snob!

The politics of poo-pooing climate change?

Dave

That's right, everything that happened up to now has been evolution, right? The animals that were able to adapt and change survived, and those not fit for their environment died out.
And now we have evolved so far..... we are such smart monkeys.... because we feel compassion... we can now discard the laws of nature and take care of all the weak and unfit, rather than accept some silly law of nature that has ruled the planet for thousands of years.

Uh.....yeah, actually. I mean, we're not perfect, but we can try?

Tell me, what highly moral and Christian approach do you suggest?

(Or, are religion and "moral values" just a tool used to advance a more nefarious goal?)

Dave

Ignorance is bliss, and the people down there seem pretty blissful.

I tend to agree Pete. There is something very unhealthy about large areas of your country refusing to accept basic truths. I think of the the middle east and all their religious zealots keeping their people either in poverty or worse.

Finn, LOL! That's bad, bad lib :D

Noone forcing people what to teach their kids is the opposite of freedom, I'd think, and more like the ME.

Pete

It's not hard to understand. If someone doesn't like what the publically funded school teaches, teach their kids themselves. Don't accept any funds from the rest of the country to further their education, including vouchers or any other assistance.

Having minimum academic standards for publicly funded schools (that also receive some Federal funding, BTW) is hardly tyranny, particularly when poor education results in the need for even more Federal funds (e.g., Medicaid, unemployment benefits, etc.).

Bob, then they shouldn't have to pay the public school, no?

Pete

Finn, Cleveland isn't arguing with the Feds and they do a horrendous job actually teaching anything.

Pete

First we are in no way free.

Second, yes for the greater good we need to insist on teaching science over believing in magic. The greater good takes away so many freedoms that IMHO it is silly to call ourselves free in the first place.

No. Not really.

Middle Eastern kids are not being dragged into the Madrassas to have recent scientific education thrust upon them. They're being brainwashed with ancient religious hullabaloo. You know, religion, the earliest form of government.:rolleyes:

I would think being forced to dogmatically adhere to antiquated, dried up ways of reasoning would be more tyrannical than anything else.

Dave

They don't pay for anything as it is. We're talkin' about po-dunk, where they're proud to have nothing and to have broken their backs to get it. They have no money in those places. That's why we must do it.

You do realize how much WELFARE money goes to APPALACHIA, don't you?

Dave

Nope.:p They should pay their taxes like everyone else. I don't buy into the argument that an individual has a say in how the money is spent. (other than through what their elected representative can get passed) Democracy isn't a pick and choose scenario no matter what the libertarians think.

"I shouldn't have to do ANYTHING that son of a bitch says! I didn't vote for him!"

I was told that, when I asked someone what he was going to do if the individual mandate is upheld.

Dave

lol! :D

Except it doesn't work that way. We all put up with policies we don't like that came from people we didn't vote for........The guy is a dumbass who doesn't get how democracy works. It is impossible to please everyone all of the time.

Dave

This is an interesting discussion. Democracy is bad because it detracts from the greater good, and because years ago citizens banded together to pay for their schools we are now required to pay for the kind of schooling the Feds require.

Very nice :rolleyes:

Pete

So, Democracy is bad, now, Pete? GW going around, "....spreading Democracy and Freedom throughout the world.", is now, a terrible thing? He should have proudly announced, "....spreading autocracy and corporatism throughout the world.", instead?

Any school district that recieves federal funding is subject to the rules and regulations set forth by the federal government. That's just how it is. Maybe we should just cut their funding off? Then they can go back to being as educated as they were in the 1920s. Yeah, there's a great idea.

I feel the next Dark Ages coming on as the priests and their sycophants slowly gain control.........

Sorry Dave, sarcasm, one more service I offer ;)

Pete

Don't wish to stray...but...on your recent hospital stay...how many foreign doctors did you come in contact with? Did many speak understandable English? Just wondering.

My Lakota orthopedic surgeon also offers haircuts, under anesthesia, natcherally....:rolleyes:

The guy who did my 4 spinal nerve blocks was goodness knows what. I won't do twilight so he's slathering anti-something or the other on my back, singing in a foreign tongue, stopping to slap my back and say 'He's my tough guy. He trusts me'. I didn't want to tell the durn fool (:) ) that I didn't have any choice.

Then, he leans over and whispers 'Sometimes I shoot myself in the leg with vitamins.'

Check please.

Pete

Ummmm, actually, come to think of it....none. Well, the surgeon had a Middle Eastern sounding name, (Alireza Farpour), but no accent at all. Sounded just as American as anyone.

Ours is quite American but when I was still working and covered by Aetna I swear all the doctors in their list were licensed by the Iranian Medical Board.:p

The reason schools receive federal funding is because the feds took the money in the first place, and then return some of it if you jump through their hoops.

I find this to be unacceptable as I'm not a fan of an ever increasing centralized government, and we supposedly have a constitutional republic as opposed to a democracy.

Why not return much of the governmental control, along with the money, to the states, or "power to the people" as I've heard it put? For no other reason than the corporate interests would no longer be able to control the country by buying off only 535 people.

Personally, if I MUST have a master, I'd like to keep him close enough that I can go burn down his barn if he pisses me off enough. Or I can organize and get his ass voted out of office.

Try going after anyone inside of the beltway and see how far you get.

Chas

Try voting out any powerful people outside of elected office and see how far you get.

Some of the states are too crazy and need more federal intervention not less.
It's no longer a matter of what we were supposed to be, we need to be one country or the civil discourse will split us apart again as it did in the mid 1800's. Certainly there are enough tears already to make this obvious.

Who do you suppose have rigged the system in the first place?

My argument is we would be better off with a less centralized government. They may have to bribe everyone to get their way, instead of using their flunkies on the hill to enact legislation which gives them even more control.

Chas

And do you know what split up apart in the 1800's? It was one section of the country attempting to enforce it's will upon another.

Now perhaps you see rural states as stark raving mad. If so, I have news for you. The rural states see the metropolitan states as stark raving mad as well.

So what's way we stay in our own little would and fuck them up as we see fit instead of trying to bull one another around?

Seems reasonable enough to me.

Chas

I dunno......maybe guys like Dave and Chuck Koch? Or J.P. Morgan...back in the day?

And tell me something;

Do you really believe any of those clowns behind the podium are going to give up their connections and power? Do you really expect me to believe the Mitt isn't a liar and only has my interests at heart? Oh, please.

I think politicians are like masturbaters;

There are those that do and those that lie about it.

Dave

Couple things. The crazy states are fighting progress. This means science as well as social advances. This is simply not healthy for us as a country. This will cost us economically and create social unrest as the gap widens.

It's not a simple matter of a differing opinion.


BTW
It's good to see a little fire in your post. ;)

No, I don't trust any of them, as a rule. Every now and then one of them will take the unpopular position, but by and large, they go along to get along.

I guess they have no choice, really.

That's why I don't like a overly centralized government. The more power any one man has makes him less responsible to me.

And as far as the super rich? As far as this country is concerned, they only have to control 535 people.

All I'm doing is advancing the argument that perhaps we've put too much power in too few of hands.

Chas

A much different argument and one I think we can all agree on.

To start with, we won't get very far by referring to one another as lunatics.

And while I can't speak for every buck toothed knuckle dragger here in fly over country (actually, I'm not speaking for any of them), we are pro science and anything but antisocial.

Just because we don't buy the pie in the sky in no way indicates that we are "stupid".

Now we are fiscally conservative. As I've said before, if green energy becomes affordable and reliable, I'll be the greenest sumbitch on the planet. And so will all of my hillbilly buddies...it's leave them with enough money to buy Colt .45 semi auto's instead of Rock Island knockoffs. Or another pig, or another cow. Any of which will make you more money than my "rekkerd player".

And as far as "social issues", what kind of people do you think we are? We want to see everyone advance their position in life as much as anyone else.

Do you really want to know the difference between us and them, or even you and I?

We all want the same thing, we simply disagree on the path to take us from here to there.

Personally, I welcome a rational discussion. But, on a national level, we don't have a rational discussion...we have soundbites.

We're too busy justifying our own arguments, and rooting for the home team, to realize that we are no different that our opponents.

If we can ever kick all of that bullshit aside, perhaps there is hope.

Chas

Wish I'd of said that in the first place.

Would have saved me a lot of keystrokes, as I do have other things to "stroke", not working for the Secret Service and all!!!

Chas