Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I was going to say the same thing, but you beat me to it. Do the 11 people who have voted no still believe that man and dinosaur walked the earth together and that the earth is only 6,000 yrs old?!?
A creationist and someone that doesn't believe in the standard theory of human evolution aren't the same thing. The earth is definitely not only 6,000 years old that's impossible. A creationist is generally a bible thumper whereas you don't have to be a bible thumper to not believe in the theory of human evolution that is taught in schools.
as they say show me the money....show me the bones.....show me MILLIONS of years and the SOCIETIES (I dont mean CITIES) of these mutations...now just a set of bones and say this MIGHT be an ancestor OR a cousin
I have no problem with someone not accepting a theory because of (perceived) lack of evidence, but let me ask you: do you believe in a God (of the gaps)?
Evolution is fact, not theory. I know the religious have a problem with this but if you need proof, explain why people have tail bones yet have never had a tail?
People don't have tail bones. People have what is correctly called a coccyx. During the first trimester of fetal development the coccyx is very long and pronounced and it looks like a tail. That's why people commonly but incorrectly call it a tail bone, plus it's easier for non-medical people to remember a name like tail bone instead of coccyx.
A Theory in Science has a very strict definition unlike the word theory in the everyday vernacular. Evolution is well documented and undisputable as evidenced by the fossil records.
If one wants to believe or teach Creationism to their children, that is their right. However, Creationism is not Science and has no place in a public school classroom.
Last edited by texan2yankee; 11-23-2016 at 11:30 AM..
Make welfare a voluntary charity. No more legal mandates interfering with the natural evolutionary process.
Financial resources ARE limited. That's exactly why it's counterproductive to our very existence to incentivize the exponential increase of the taker class. Refer to my Bio 101 experiment example.
Yes. There are animals that will take in orphaned offspring who would otherwise perish without the presence of a parent who can provide for them. But that happens on a voluntary basis.
It seems like the last millennium of humanitarian evolution has by-passed you.
A Theory in Science has a very strict definition unlike the word theory in the everyday vernacular. Evolution is well documented and undisputable as evidenced by in the fossil records.
If one wants to believe or teach Creationism to their children, that is their right. However, Creationism is not Science and has no place in a public school classroom.
There are tons of people that have disputed the standard theory of human evolution, not just religious people. The schools should show both sides of the argument but not put a religious spin on it at all.
The problem is the religious organizations have ruined the discussion because they're all about trying to make people believe in one God and the Bible.
Academia hasn't been totally honest about the fossil record because many people have an agenda.
There are tons of people that have disputed the standard theory of human evolution, not just religious people. The schools should show both sides of the argument but not put a religious spin on it at all.
What is there to teach about creationism without the religious spin? "Some people believe a God magically spawns everything" and then what? Creationism has had it's moment for thousands of years and never really explained anything. You better come up with some very good new material if you want to add it to the curriculum
It seems like the last millennium of humanitarian evolution has by-passed you.
Not at all. I'm a pragmatist. And I can look at what should be a naturally occurring progression without have irrational emotions cloud my judgment. Consider the following...
Women receiving public assistance, as a group, have a birth rate 3 times higher than women who don't receive public assistance. That, in itself has led to the additional problem of nearly half of all U.S. births being paid for by Medicaid. 70% of those kids will never rise out of poverty, even as adults.
Who thinks supporting all those additional poor people (Medicaid, food stamps, public housing, etc., etc.) that are added to our population every year is sustainable, or even possible at all? What's the proposal for funding food, clothing, shelter, and medical care for all those who will never be self-supporting their entire lives? And how do we get that ever-increasing burden to NOT negatively impact the support of our aging population who've actually PAID into SS and Medicare throughout their entire decades of their working careers? What's your suggestion for solving the problem of the exponentially increasing dependent class population competing directly with the seniors who've prepaid taxes for decades for their retirement benefits in a country in which financial resources AREN'T unlimited?
Darwin, not being a complete idiot, knew that scientific theories apply within a limited scope. He didn't set out to describe economic or sociological phenomena, he was a biologist. Writing about biology.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Do you believe in the theory of evolution?
