NEWS: Evolution Is A Theory Not A Fact Stickers Must Be Removed From Georgia Textbooks

Ever watch a carnival tent being erected? Without the small number of poles punctuating the tent material here and there from underneath, the tent would have absolutely no support whatsoever.

Now, it may very well be that the tent has hundreds of poles supporting it, or thousands, but in the end a tent is a tent is a tent!

Calling someone emotionally blocked or bigoted simply because they don't understand how tents are being fabricated and supported these days is not only bad manners, its bad logic since the one argument has absolutely nothing to do with the other, except possibly of course through an emotionally blocked and bigoted forced correlation.

ê¿ê



[edit on 13-1-2005 by sozzledboot]

[edit on 13-1-2005 by sozzledboot]

The fossil record kinda points to evolution being fact. Its a little late for the Pope to be revising what the Bible purports to be the "truth". Whats next? Dinosaurs being added to the the Bible? Radiocarbon dating to be complete nonsense? Or Dinosaurs to have lived and become extinct and fossilized within the last 6,000 years?

In the end that sticker, that clearly sets out to strengthen creationists arguments, really means nothing. Give these kids some credit and let them make their own minds up. A poxy little sticker in a book wont cover up the irrefutable evidence that leans towards evolution as truth.

Originally posted by TheWrAiTH
If evolution isn't a theory, then prove it!

Come on! Get real! If man evolved from Monkeys or apes to be exact as "evolution" would have us believe, then, WHY ARE THERE STILL APES AROUND?

Hmmmm?

[edit on 13/1/05 by Intelearthling]

well, i think the whole thing is coz you HAVE to go to school but not church. im positive the hardcore thumpers TELL their kids to believe in creationism- sticker or not - and are just mad coz little bobby agnostic and little jimi athiest are ONLY getting the evolution theory.

also, there is a HUMONGO difference between the THEORY of evolution and the DOGMA of creationism.

i never heard of the dogma of relativity...

Originally posted by Intelearthling

Originally posted by TheWrAiTH
If evolution isn't a theory, then prove it!

Come on! Get real! If man evolved from Monkeys or apes to be exact as "evolution" would have us believe, then, WHY ARE THERE STILL APES AROUND?

Hmmmm?

[edit on 13/1/05 by Intelearthling]

becasue there is more than one species of ape, doi.

Originally posted by Intelearthling
[]WHY ARE THERE STILL APES AROUND

This is a joke right? I mean, there's no way that you are honestly interested in the subject and have studied it enough to be able to state that itsobvious and hte like but not actually know why there are still apes, right?

I mean, you must've come across the answer in your own studying of evolution, so whats the problem with the answer?

Originally posted by Intelearthling
Come on! Get real! If man evolved from Monkeys or apes to be exact as "evolution" would have us believe, then, WHY ARE THERE STILL APES AROUND?

The theory of evolution doesn't suggest that humans evolved from monkeys and apes. It suggests, with considerable evidence, that all primates share a common ancestor.

www.google.com...



[edit on 05/1/13 by GradyPhilpott]

What most people have a problem with is that people tend to get overwhelmed with all the evidance to support Evolution they often forget that it is still a theory, but a very plausable theory.

Me thinks the Judge was a little bias to declare it was supporting religion. He might want to point out which religion it supports and where in the sticker it shows that.

Implied comments does not mean it is true

Originally posted by PistolPete
It's not the fact that they shouldn't teach it, it's the fact that they shouldn't strike all dissenting opinions about it out of the equation. When I was learned about evolution in Biology it was taught as a fact - we weren't even taught the criticisms of the theory by non-religious scholars and scientists.

John Taylor Gatto, the New York City teacher of the year several times and highly respected speaker and author in the field of education essentially believes that Darwin, who was an elite, created the the Theory of Evolution as justification to keep the lower classes down. (He made this claim in one of his books, but this snippet is kind of an example of what he thinks.)

www.johntaylorgatto.com
What evolution has to do with the macropolitics of schooling becomes clear if you consider that both are concerned with what should be encouraged to thrive, and what should be helped to perish. Evolutionary theory made all the difference in how systematic schooling was internally arranged. Too much effort wasn’t wasted on hopeless trash, and the good stock was separated from the common. With justification.

Global entrepreneurs such as John D. Rockefeller Sr. and Andrew Carnegie found natural selection to be a perfect explanation for their laissez-faire economic principles. To Rockefeller, for instance, "the growth of large business is merely survival of the fittest"; savage business practices aren’t evil, "merely the working out of a law of nature and a law of God." According to Herbert Spencer, nothing escaped evolution’s power: "every single organism" or institution evolved, religions evolved, economies evolved; evolution exposed democratic theory for the childish fantasy it really was.

Its pretty obvious that that was the intent by the enlightened members of the schoold boards had Creation Science in mind. Eveolution can be backed up and proven time and time again.

And quite often the science behind evolution can be proven bad. But everyone ignores when that happens.

I'll stand by my original statements - nothing in the text of that sticker promoted creationism or religion (even if that's what they had in mind). It doesn't say that they're teaching creationism, it says to keep an open mind.

Ummm, Alfred Russel Wallace, you know the other guy who indepedently came up with the idea of natural selection and was a co-presenter to the Royal Academy along with Darwin was not an "elite". He was as blue collar a scientist as you can get, nevermind that he turned very leftist later in life. All while still standing by his work on evolution. So maybe Mr. Taylor needs to actually learn history before making outlandish statements like that.

Oh yeah, by the way people, evolution is a fact. There are theories of how evolution occurs, and there is some debate about those--e.g. the relative importance of drift versus selection. But there is no debate about whether or not evolution occurs. It has been demonstrated in the field, in the lab and in the fossil record time and time again. Creation and intelligent design have not been shown to operate in the field, nor in the fossil record, nor upon experimental populations of organisms in the lab.

.
Creationism isn't even a theory.

Well I guess we won't have to require "Creationism isn't even a theory" on Bibles.

Creationism is NOT a science, theory, it is ONLY a belief.

Science class should be presented as pure science.

Creationism can be taught in religious studies in church or religious studies class.
.

Originally posted by Damned

Biologists consider the existence of biological evolution to be a fact. It can be demonstrated today and the historical evidence for its occurrence in the past is overwhelming.
[edit on 13-1-2005 by Damned]

Let me clarify the above statement a bit. Evolution needs to be broken down into two types. The first type is micro-evolution. It is the kind of thing that we can observe in the directed breeding experiments that bring about special breeds of dogs and other domestic animals. It is considered an observed and scientific fact because it is provable by repeatable experimentation. Macro-evolution, on the other hand, is one species evolving into another species such as a gekko evolving into an alligator. This type of evolution has NEVER been observed nor has experimentation shown it to be possible. The idea that one species can macro-evolve into another is what the theory of Evolution, as taught in the high school text books, is all about. As such it is a completely unproven theory.

The mechanism of micro-evolution has never been shown to apply to macro-evolution even when significant effort and intelligence is applied to attempt to make it happen. Science has been attempting through a variety of methods to create new species from the DNA of other species but has yet to succeed in creating even a single new species. Now any number of subspecies can be created from an original sample, this is micro-evolution. Even it has its limitations since it has yet to be observed where new genetic material has ever been added to the species evolved. Instead what happens in Micro-evolution is that there is a reshuffling of the genetic material present and its order causing abnormalities to appear in the code. At no time however has that code been shown to have taken on greater complexity than the orginal copy. That increase in complexity is what is necessary to prove that a lizard can become an alligator. There needs to be demostrated a mechanism by which the genetic code can become more complex and not just reshuffled.

Until such a mechanism is discovered and tested the theory of Evolution, which relies on macro-evolution, is just that, a THEORY, and an unsubstantiated one at that.

I'm against this ruling for one and only one reason: it continues the acknowledgement of this childish religious debate as a judicial priority for America. We have -real- problems people! Corporations are robbing people of their pensions and cheating investors, we are trying to answer serious questions about civil liberties versus safety from terrorists. Isn't that what people ought to think about when they consider what sort of judicial appointments they want out of their elected representatives? The "acknowledge by God" arguement is not going to help anyone in any way. Not one person -ever- has been "saved" as Christians call it, by a sticker on a text book. Not one person has -ever- gone to hell because they wouldn't repent for opposing that sticker.

I believe the case should have been thrown out and the person who tried to bring it should have been fined for wasting the court's time.

science and evolution is an interpretation of gods work they kind of go hand and hand our time isnt his time so everything was set in motion and juss had to blossom thru what we call evolution

and the sticker about evolution is just a theory not a fact is a fact so why B*tch and complain about a simple truth regardless of the intention

[edit on 14-1-2005 by Gods Shadow]

[edit on 14-1-2005 by Gods Shadow]

Originally posted by Intelearthling
Come on! Get real! If man evolved from Monkeys or apes to be exact as "evolution" would have us believe, then, WHY ARE THERE STILL APES AROUND?

Hmmm indeed: Perhaps because its the evolution, not extinction. and it is possible to parallel a species.

Originally posted by Intelearthling
Come on! Get real! If man evolved from Monkeys or apes to be exact as "evolution" would have us believe, then, WHY ARE THERE STILL APES AROUND?

you ever read the "RA materlial" or about the law of one that might explain a little about why theres still apes around

ascension2000.com...

the info on that site might sound crazy but if you have an open mind im sure it would make logical sense to you


[edit on 14-1-2005 by Gods Shadow]

Please elaborate on the above reference, can you also edit your quoting so It does not appear that i sad that Thanks

The bottom line is this: Evolution can be tested by science.

Creationism, while all fine and good for a Sunday school class is not a science nor is it a fact. Not only is the timeline impossible and fails to explain the lack of fossilizeed un evolved humans with the dinasour bones. etc etc etc.

fact: we know the world is older than the bible says.
fact: we know the universe and the world were not created in 7 days.
fact: we know the earth was once covered in water before the great flood.
creationism, as i stated before, is a Dogma, not a theory.

dogma: n, a religious doctrine that is proclaimed as true without proof [syn: tenet]

- theory: n, a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena; "theories can incorporate facts and laws and tested hypotheses"; "true in fact and theory"

i hope that the difference is now as clear as the mud my lungfish ancestors evolved out of in the devonian era, a time that we have proof of but does not exist according to creationism.

if they put that sticker on textbooks for evolution they have to put it on every textbook in school with a theory in it.

on a sidenote, in pennsylvania, they ruled in a small town that teachers had to read a disclaimer similar to that sticker. the teachers refused, and made me proud by doing so.

Originally posted by FredT
Please elaborate on the above reference, can you also edit your quoting so It does not appear that i sad that

Thanks

its really to much information to explain on here you'd have to read it for yourself to really get into it deep and analyze the information deeply
but think about how humans are more advanced then all creatures on the planet because of our level of conciousness it talks about how theres 8 levels of conciousness and about a lot of different interesting things

1st level of conciousness or the first density

FIRST DENSITY



One part of Ra’s model needs to be made clear: we can visually perceive all forms on Earth and elsewhere that have first, second and third-density levels of consciousness, not just the third. Hence, these densities are not directly similar to the concept of ‘higher dimensions’, as we shall explain later. Ra teaches that the first density is the world of the elements – earth, air, fire and water. In this density there is simply empty awareness that has no central focus of space or time. Gradually, as these elements disrupt each other, such as by water moving over earth, awareness eventually becomes more localized into that area of space and time. This causes the spiraling intelligent energy to combine into “increasingly intelligent patterns” therein, and thus the basic elements will begin forming into amino acids and eventually DNA molecules, which signals the bridge into second density.

SECOND DENSITY



The second density encompasses all forms that we normally consider to be “living,” from single-celled organisms to plants to animals, birds and fish, except human beings. In this density, there is awareness, but these organisms still do not have a sense of a separate self – they have a group awareness that is shared amongst all of their species. This gives rise to various observable phenomena, such as flocks of birds or schools of fish that can all make sudden, simultaneous changes in their direction of movement. Dr. Rupert Sheldrake has written extensively on this subject, which is not difficult to understand if we can accept that consciousness is all around us, not just within our own minds. Consciousness is naturally shared between particular species of animals, via the intelligent energy that connects all life in the Universe, and there is also some degree of sharing between all different species as well.



The different animals within a given species are always consulting this “group mind” as they go throughout their daily routines, and if enough animals have the same experience, the knowledge gained from this experience becomes a part of the group-mind. Hence we have the famous “hundredth monkey” effect, where a series of monkeys were studied on separate islands, all isolated from each other. The scientists performing the study presented the monkeys with a challenge for gathering food that they had never encountered before. Either potatoes or rice were presented to the monkeys, but they were covered in sand. Some of the monkeys got the idea to wash the food in the stream and remove the sand. After approximately 100 of the monkeys did this, a “critical mass” was reached. Suddenly, every monkey on every island was no longer perplexed by the problem; they would all immediately wash the rice or potatoes as if they had always known how to do it, though they had never been in contact with any of the first 100 monkeys who solved the puzzle on their own.



Hence, a critical threshold was reached once the “hundredth monkey” learned the skill, and the behavior became completely automatic. This shows us how a new survival concept was written into the group-mind of this particular species of monkey. In Ra’s model, this would represent an aspect of conscious evolution of that species as a group, precipitated by the free will of its members. It is a natural system designed for lower-level organisms to adapt to their surroundings and thereby be able to function in a largely automatic fashion. In time, this effect may be seen as one of the finest scientific discoveries of the 20th century.



THIRD DENSITY



The next question would be, “If animals can share thoughts, then why can’t most humans?” The answer to the question is that we do still have a propensity towards “groupthink,” though not on the directly conscious telepathic level any longer. In order to progress to the human level, we must shed some of what we have gained in second-density. The third-density is the first plane where each organism has a direct consciousness of itself as a separate being. In order to have a consciousness of being separate, we must lose the ability to merge with others of our own kind into a “group-mind.” Our own individual mind actually becomes far more powerful in this process. We certainly hold the memory of having a group-mind that will allow us to run on ‘autopilot,’ and thus we can succumb to the “herd mentality” or what Dr. Caroline Myss calls the “tribal instinct” where we want to be part of a group, and let the group do all of our thinking for us. The problem with having a group-mind is that it removes the need for most individual thinking, reasoning and learning, and we never really grow by experience. With third-density awareness comes the advent of conscious processes that are not directly required for survival, such as love, compassion and creativity. This is considered to be the most important level of existence in the Universe in the spiritual sense, as it presents one with very unique conditions, as follows:

Originally posted by jprophet420
fact: we know the world is older than the bible says.
fact: we know the universe and the world were not created in 7 days.
fact: we know the earth was once covered in water before the great flood.

yea we know the worl and the universe wasnt created in 7 days (not literally)but if your some kind of higher being do you think 7 days in our eyes would be the same for it?if it wasnt taken so literal to that extent you could interpet the time frame differently