Latest CBS poll on evolution vs. creatio n

“check out the big brain on bearmagnet”

“Have you read any of Brain Greene's books on String Theory? I was fortunate enough to see him speak at OSU a couple of years ago. It's exciting stuff!”

“btw, wheres buck? how dare he stir up a hornets nest then leave. why, we oughtta....”

“........crucify him!!!!!!!!!

BB - Greene & String Theory are on my list...”

“The poll results are depressing. When public beliefs are based on claims of authority and not evidence, public discourse suffers.

And its not just evolution that the majority in this poll are rejecting, but the overwhelming evidence that the human species has changed and evolved (whether guided by God, or according to natural selection).

Sad to say, this supports Buddha Bear's theory of the 2004 elections.
last edited: 11/23/04 2:11:44 PM”

“I thought this was about the evolution of CBS from an news organization to a propaganda mill that creates it's own news.”

“Before you get too depressed, read the fine print at the bottom:

This poll was conducted among a random sample of 17 adults interviewed in the parking lot of the Luverne Cracker Barrel November 18-21, 2004.”

“Polls, schmolls.

Science is not democratic.”

“I didn't know part of the Moral Mandate was to become dumber.








(Actually, yes I did)”

“you nailed it marko.

good one, vi.”

“Good point on the democracy end of it. There is no room for the touchy feely stuff in the scientific method.”

“A couple thoughts on this. 1) Science is open-minded and does not automatically exclude anything and it doesn't only take one trail in its quest for knowledge. It explores all trails for information and truth. 2) Hmmm... I forget my second point. Oh, I remember! But it wasn't a good point, so I'll concede #2. 3) I would not want any specific "religion" regarding origins taught in science. Not Biblical Creation nor any other creation story/hypothesis. But "intelligent design" is legit... it's merely a theory, contrary to the "meaninngless random" theory of evolution. It is scientifically based data showing a strong possibility of intelligent thought and reasoning behind creation. To exclude either one would not be true science.

Science is not a democracy, as it was suggested, but neither is it a totalitarian system thingy situation that is dictated upon us even when legitimate competing theories exist. If you disagree with me you hafta admit, if you're honest, that you completely suck. Thank you.”

“I'm not sure what you said, so I can't say I disagree with you. So I guess I don't completely suck. But I'm not sure about that.”

“"Intelligent design" should really be called "wishful thinking".

It involves seeking proof for a pre-determined conclusion.

OK, I suck........but not as much as Geobeet. >8^P”

“Happy turkey day Marko!”

“You too, stinker!!”

“any christian scientists out there?”

“ENS - The religion Christian Scientist or a Scientist who is a Christian?”

“Too bad I couldn't have written, "....and then, a miracle occurred.", at the end of my Geology papers in college.”

“Buck and his "Watchmaker Theory".

Now that was a debate that really made me dizzy.”

“the religion christian science”

“

http://pst.rbma.com/content/Bizarro?date=20041127
last edited: 11/27/04 5:20:58 PM”

“Darn.... then check the November 27th bizarro at:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/fun/bizarro.asp”

“Some new disclaimer stickers for science textbooks.

This textbook contains material on gravity. Gravity is a theory, not a fact, regarding a force that cannot be directly seen. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered.”

“Why would gravity (I assume we're talking Newton) be treated as an objective fact in textbooks nearly 100 years after Einstien to begin with?

Ha ha, somebody was making a joke with this one and didn't realize that the joke was on them.
last edited: 11/29/04 11:21:18 AM”

“So which would hit first if ya dropped them both off a building at the same time? G-d or a rock?”

“I am neither a scientist nor well-versed in scientific method, but I would think that gravity can be reproduced in controlled scientific experiments, whereas creation cannot.”

“Gravity is a great theory that describes things well enough for almost anything we do. However it has been trumped by General Relativity which better describes how things work when you get into truly massive scale.
last edited: 11/29/04 11:25:36 AM”

“I made a virus using a DNA synthesizer in school. It took a day, now it takes an hour.

Also - there is a theoretical particle for gravity, Fritz, but they can't find it.

Therefore/ergo/sum - gravity doesn't exist.”

“Nice pontification Ratboy. :)”

“LMAO! Thank you, thank you very much.

Care to dance?
last edited: 11/29/04 11:29:02 AM”

“Gravity is a great example to apply when thinking about evolution as fact or theory. Gravity was pretty much wholey accepted as fact before Einstien, you never know what somebody's gonna figure out.”

“So we're waiting for Einstein II to come up with a General Evolution Relativity theory????????

Or maybe the Book of Mormons is the GERT?
last edited: 11/29/04 11:38:12 AM”

“No we're waiting for someone else to come along who thinks up a better idea for how we got to be what we are. People didn't forsee at the time that the operations of the universe could result from anything other than gravity, there was not, as there is not now for evolution, a great smoking gun that showed that the theory was not correct. Experiments had to be devised to show that General Relativity trumped gravity, we could easily come to the same circumstance regarding evolution.

It's interesting how the page Violin linked to works, and shows the problem with accepting evolution as fact rather than theory. the author posts a list of things that he thinks would be absurd to include as disclaimers, showing that he thinks gravity should be absolutely taught as objective fact, he obviously hasn't spent too much time with physics. Like I said, the jokes on him.
last edited: 11/29/04 11:41:44 AM”

“The Theory of gravity was "wrong"?”

“Yes BM, sorry to disappoint you, You are held to the earth because you accelerate toward it along a curve made in space-time by the larger body (As described by General Relativity, At least that's the accepted theory nowadays). They didn't teach you this in school?
last edited: 11/29/04 11:48:31 AM”

“Screw evolution and gravity. I want someone to explain the theory concerning the time space continuum that causes the next camp to take 2 hours longer to get to than I always calculate.”

“I like to call that the "Slow-Nigal Theory"”

“Nothing about Gravity was right?????????

LMFAO Nigal! I'm trying to be serious here, dammit!”

“BM's having a melt down, he's afraid he's gonna float away....”

“OK Mr. Smartypants. Then try to explain the missing sock in the dryer theory. I have a whole drawer full of single hiking socks.”

“Bison -

"In spite of the mystery behind the mechanisms of gravity, physicists have been able to describe the behavior of objects under the influence of gravity quite thoroughly. Isaac Newton, a 17th- and 18th-century English scientist and mathematician (among other things), was the first person to propose a mathematical model to describe the gravitational attraction between objects. Albert Einstein built upon this model in the 20th century and devised a more complete description of gravity in his Theory of General Relativity. In this module, we will explore Newton’s description of gravity and some of the experimental confirmations of his theory that came many years after he proposed his original idea."

So Newtonian was improved with Einsteinian.

Therefore/ergo/sum: don't hold your breath that evolution will "give" way to "humans were created in His image"

Or evo doesn't evolve.

;)

Nigal - when you close the door a small sockhole is created in the dryer vacuum.”

“Not exactly BM, Newtonian gravity is based on the idea that the earth is exerting a force on you, and that force is holding you to the earth. That is not correct. We know now that the Earth is actually curving space-time. both you and the Earth are constantly accelerating through space. but you are trapped in the curve created by the mass of the earth and so always accelerate toward the earth. Newton and his gravity were wrong. Gravity is still important however because the theory does describe things almost perfectly on any scale that we actually use and is simpler than using General Relativity, but the basis for the theory is indeed incorrect.”

“I'm not dancing over semantics with you! I only do that with Nigal!”

“We know now that the Earth is actually curving space-time. both you and the Earth are constantly accelerating through space

Who was complaining that people take "theories" as facts?”

“I included a disclaimer in the following post BM that you convienently skipped...

"(As described by General Relativity, At least that's the accepted theory nowadays)."”

““I'm not dancing over semantics with you! I only do that with Nigal!”


I do believe this is the first monogamist statement you’ve ever made!”

“LMFAO Nigal! Stop and desist!

It's hard enough dealing with the fact that Newton knew nothing without your witticisms!

Next thing you'll tell me is that alchemy is all a bunch of crap!

Or that Lamark was wrong!
last edited: 11/29/04 12:20:31 PM”

“So who is going to explain women now?

I have a great theory that involves the curvature of their bodies and how men are constantly accelerating along those curves towards said bodies, but it hasn't been proved yet.”

“"Next thing you'll tell me is that alchemy is all a bunch of crap!"

Only when it's not practiced behind a bar...”