Miss America on evolution

DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
edited July 2012 in General Discussion Posts: 24,183


I'm flattered that quite a few of these ladies agree that evolution should be taught in school, however the few who don't honestly frighten me. It's not exactly a matter of belief...

What do you think?
«1

Comments

  • LudsLuds MIA
    edited August 2011 Posts: 1,986
    Thanks you miss Vermont for not being a complete moron like the first few bimbos who don't believe in evolution.

    LOL @ Georgia: Kids need to make their own decisions.
    OK. Yeah, 3+3 = 9 for me, but it's 7 for my sister.
  • Posts: 136
    Wow. There were some really beautiful idiots in that vid. I particularly enjoyed the "evolution is a theory" girl.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,183
    Some of them really feel like it shouldn't be taught in school... Wow. Because it's true? Some of them no doubt think the Earth is flat and the Moon landing was staged on the blacklot of a film studio. :P
  • Posts: 136
    I just can't believe that this is a debate. Should they teach facts in school??? erm.......yeah. :(|)
  • DiscoVolanteDiscoVolante Stockholm, Sweden
    edited August 2011 Posts: 1,347
    Oh my...

    @Luds, I actually think Miss Georgia was one of the wiser ones. Teach kids both religious blaha and evolution, and let them make their own decision what to believe in. Hopefully the evolution classes set the poor kids straight ;)

    Go Miss California! :X
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,183
    Miss California is my hero! She's a 'science geek', that's right. :X

    I hope she wins. Science never looked that good. ;;)
  • DiscoVolanteDiscoVolante Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts: 1,347
    Yes, everything seems good about her ;)

  • ChevronChevron Northern Ireland
    Posts: 370
    Just to be a bit pedantic, evolution is actually a theory, i.e. the best explanation that fits the observed evidence. In science a theory is about as sure as you can be about something because someone might run an experiment or find evidence that means you have to refine the theory or come up with a new one.

    Of course that means you can have people who go 'oh, it's only a theory, I have one too,' without understanding that it's a 'scientific theory' and... Oh, never mind. This is turning into a very pedantic post. Sigh.
  • j7wildj7wild Suspended
    edited August 2011 Posts: 823
    shouldn't this be in the YouTube thread?

    http://www.mi6community.com/index.php?p=/discussion/comment/29953#Comment_29953

    because I quite recall starting a thread with a YouTube video in it and then I got chastised for not posting it in the YouTube thread; but it seems the rules applies differently to everyone here but me:

    http://www.mi6community.com/index.php?p=/discussion/1041/hey-thats-hans-zimmer#Item_5

    of course, considering who started this thread and who is the first person to reply who also happened to say regarding my locked YouTube video thread:

    "Yes it should. Some people never learn."

    I am not surprised why this hasn't been locked and moved into the YouTube thread.

    Playing favoritism again and/or ignoring the rules!!
  • DiscoVolanteDiscoVolante Stockholm, Sweden
    edited August 2011 Posts: 1,347
    This thread has a discussion connected to the video. Yours is a posted music video, suitable for the YouTube thread.
  • j7wildj7wild Suspended
    edited August 2011 Posts: 823
    This thread has a discussion connected to the video. Yours is just a music video clip?
    my was a music video clip showing Hans Zimmer before he became famous and he just happened to be in the VERY FIRST video ever to be shown on MTV and on TV anywhere in the world in the history of Television so that thread was also a good subject for discussion.

    why?

    does it make it less a subject for discussion than this thread?

    explain to me how it does so?

    you folks are a joke - you take the rules and bend them as you go along to your own liking and play favoritism based on which MI6 member you like better.

    You remind me of those people at the TSA at the US Airports!!


  • DiscoVolanteDiscoVolante Stockholm, Sweden
    edited August 2011 Posts: 1,347
    I can't see you trying to start a discussion with that thread, the only answers you'd get would be "cool", "HZ rocks!". Why not start a general thread about Hans Zimmer and include a few clips if you want.

    With this thread, Dimi wanted to hear other opinions on stupid Miss Americas. He's trying to get a topic going and could've started the very same discussion without that clip, it was just a complement.
  • j7wildj7wild Suspended
    Posts: 823
    I can't see you trying to start a discussion with that thread, the only answers you'd get would be "cool", "HZ rocks!". Why not start a general thread about Hans Zimmer and include a few clips if you want.

    With this thread, Dimi wanted to hear other opinions on stupid Miss Americas. He's trying to get a topic going and could've started the very same discussion without that clip, it was just a complement.

    it's kind of hard to start a discussion in my thread when it was locked up the same day, within minutes, after only 2 replies and I and the rest of the MI6 members were not given the time to even began a discussion, isn't it?

    you know what, about your argument?

    WHATEVER!!

    This Miss America video could had been posted in the YouTube thread video and a discussion on "stupid Miss Americas" (kind of general statement on your part, isn't it? Miss Americas are ALL Stupid to you, now?) could still had been engaged!!
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,183
    Indeed, Disco. Thank you.

    @j7 You contributed 3 posts to this first page and none of them involve the topic at hand. You made your point, it was countered. Please give it a rest. If it would please you, I'll simply remove the You Tube link from the first post.


    Now, back on topic
    Just to be a bit pedantic, evolution is actually a theory, i.e. the best explanation that fits the observed evidence. In science a theory is about as sure as you can be about something because someone might run an experiment or find evidence that means you have to refine the theory or come up with a new one.

    Of course that means you can have people who go 'oh, it's only a theory, I have one too,' without understanding that it's a 'scientific theory' and... Oh, never mind. This is turning into a very pedantic post. Sigh.
    Sir, you're on to something for sure. It is a theory indeed, not proven fact, and almost certainly true. Truer in any case than some of its competitors, which often lack scientific evidence to support even a tenth of what they say. They border on magic.

    Also, many false ideas exist concerning evolution. Many people believe that evolution theory states we are descendant from apes. That is not what is says though. We and the bonobo apes share a common ancestor is what the theory says.


  • DiscoVolanteDiscoVolante Stockholm, Sweden
    edited August 2011 Posts: 1,347
    It's a bit funny.. When I was in the US, most Americans I met were like me; agnostics/atheists (at least not science/evolution bashing bible huggers).

    (Could be explained by the fact that I didn't meet any miss America girls over there! ;) )
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,183
    I manage to be a scientist without having to be atheist. ;;) Religion and science can be reconciled. However, I do believe it's a matter of individual choice. Now, you can't deny science. That's ridiculous. You can, however, choose to add religion or not. For some, it will add something to their life, for others, it won't matter all that much.

    As far as our misses are concerned, I wonder how many of the anti-evolution ones actually meant what they said and weren't just trying to amuse some deeply religious voters and fans. :)
  • I manage to be a scientist without having to be atheist. ;;) Religion and science can be reconciled. However, I do believe it's a matter of individual choice. Now, you can't deny science. That's ridiculous. You can, however, choose to add religion or not. For some, it will add something to their life, for others, it won't matter all that much.
    Pretty much the exact point I was going to make before seeing your post (and well worded, I'd say). Science and religion are not mutually exclusive concepts, despite seemingly popular insistence that being of the persuasion that one is valid makes you sworn enemy of the other (though that unfortunately seems to be the case for some).

  • I'm actually of the opinion that Darwinian evolution should not be taught in schools...because there's no evidence for it, and it's patently absurd. The issue at hand isn't science vs. religion, as the two can function together quite readily. In fact, most of the latest developments in biology (yes, biology) and physics are best explained by appealing to the propostion that the primary motive powers of the universe are intelligence and will, and not chance and accident, which is the true import of the evolution debate.

    "As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear-headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research into atoms this much. There is no matter, as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particles of the atom to vibration. I must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter." ~Max Planck
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Good topic @Dimi, but I have to say I'm at a crossroads. I have no religious beliefs, due to a high opinion that science has shown fact, while religion has just the bible to rely on. Which doesn't help their argument. Being an atheist can be awkward when religion comes into conversation. It can be seen as a joke by some who religion has no effect on like myself. I don't believe in a next life, just six feet under, and that started the beliefs I now hold. I side with the evolution viewpoint because of actual factual information. Evolution is filled with comparisons of humans and apes, and the links between them. The similar chromosomes are also important to note, and my views that evolution did indeed occur are further cemented. Whatever the case, some of the answers in the video were vague and one suggested to let the government handle it. A horrible choice in my opinion, as the world's governments are embroiled in bigger matters and can barely handle what is on their plate. She didn't read 1984 I take it. All kidding aside, those are my basic views, and I don't mean to insult any religious people on this forum by outlining them. We all have our beliefs and the freedom to hold them, so no harm done. ;-)
  • DiscoVolanteDiscoVolante Stockholm, Sweden
    edited August 2011 Posts: 1,347
    I'm actually of the opinion that Darwinian evolution should not be taught in schools...because there's no evidence for it, and it's patently absurd.
    But teaching fairy tales is OK? O:)
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,183
    I'm actually of the opinion that Darwinian evolution should not be taught in schools...because there's no evidence for it, and it's patently absurd.
    I disagree, GL.

    The Darwinian evolution theory is presently the most scientifically supported of the available theories. Its competitors are much less backed up by science. It isn't factually proven, I know, but it's the least 'unproven' of the bunch, if you catch my drift. :) I believe it's important to always teach kids the best available theory. If, one day, evidence shows up that proves the Darwinian evolution theory flawed, we will need to adjust the theory and we will accept its modified version. Science, when conducted correctly, allows 'falsification'. According to Popper, that is one of the most important distinctions between science and pseudoscience. Creationists, for example, hardly ever allow their ideas to be modified in accordance with new observations or genetic evidence. This intellectual rigidity almost by default renders their views invalid. If you don't accept and adopt new elements to critically reconsider your theory and modify it where necessary, you automatically reduce your thoughts to magic.

    For centuries people believed the Earth to be the centre of the universe. People believed the Earth to be a flat disc. People denied the idea of discontinuous matter (atoms). Organic substances were thought by Vitalism to be created by a divine force only, unable to be manufactured synthetically. Earth would only be a few thousand years old... All of these ridiculous misconceptions were one by one demystified by science, however. There's enough evidence to support modern scientific views on those matters and, in fact, in some cases we can actually 'see' the truth. Seeing is believing, no? ;;)

    It worries me that the thought of Earth being only a few thousand years old, created out of nothingness in a matter of a few days, still exists today. People reject evidence in such a way I frankly question their intelligence. There's no reason why I would be insulting God when I follow the Big Bang Theory and all that builds on that. They, however, pretend that God is like a microwave cook, shoving a few things in the microwave and 1 . 2 . 3 - we have a populated Universe! THAT is the biggest insult one can give God, if you ask me.

    In time, Darwinian evolution theory, slightly modified or not, will ultimately be proven factually correct, of that I'm fairly confident. It will be yet another sad case of fanatics fighting fierce wars to blind us and themselves from the truth. One day, they'll be comically referred to in school as "those idiots", the same way kids snigger today when one reminds them that Earth was once though flat.
  • Posts: 618
    GRAVITY is technically just a scientific "theory"... When fundies learn this, you can almost see wisps of smoke curling from their ears. ("B-but... 'theories' are lib'rul!")
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,183
    ("B-but... 'theories' are lib'rul!")
    :-D Makes me smile, CG.

    You know, gravity is a concept we still struggle with. We know it exists, but we just can't seem to figure out how it works. Is it caused by the 'gravitons'? Is it a ripple in higher dimensions? One of those things that make science so fascinating for me. ;;)
  • edited August 2011 Posts: 503
    Threads like this really shouldn't exist on MI6. I've just lost some respect for GeorgeLazenby for no good reason. I didn't want to know that he is a creationist who denies evolution... this topic shouldn't have been brought up. :-(
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,183
    Threads like this really shouldn't exist on MI6. I've just lost some respect for GeorgeLazenby for no good reason. I didn't want to know that he is a creationist who denies evolution, it shouldn't have been brought up. :-(
    I don't think that's fair, @Bond. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and everyone has the liberty to decide whether or not to share this opinion with the rest of us. I too disagree with GL at great lengths, but I can't bring myself to losing respect for the man. :-) In fact, I find discussions such as this one very thrilling and interesting.

  • edited August 2011 Posts: 503
    I suppose you're right Darth, but calling the position that there is no evidence for Darwinian evolution an "opinion" is false, because it is instead a rejection of fact. So far, every person I've ever come across who denies it is either ignorant and uneducated, or a staunch biblical literalist/creationist.

    I don't want to jump the gun with GL, but I'd like to hear his reasoning behind rejecting evolution by natural selection, and I do hope what he presents is thrilling and interesting, not something we've heard thousands of times before.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,183
    I suppose you're right Darth, but calling the position that there is no evidence for Darwinian evolution an "opinion" is false
    That is true, friend. I was referring to his opinion concerning whether or not the evolution theory should be taught in school. ;;)

  • edited August 2011 Posts: 503
    Ah, I see. But he bases his opinion that it should not be taught in schools on his denial that there is scientific evidence for it. If he were to instead base it on his view that evolution is at odds with his personal religious belief system, I could respect his opinion.

    I'm sorry, but if I'm going to be honest I don't see it as much different than saying the Holocaust shouldn't be taught to schoolchildren because there's no evidence for it.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,183
    You're right there, @Bond. I think it's very important to teach evolution theory and the big bang theory. And denial of said theories is becoming progressively more idiotic since more and more evidence comes our way.

    I'm going to be very honest too. I think science should become much more important in our lives. It should be taught as quickly as humanly possible. We are facing some tough challenges in the near future and for what it's worth, our species won't last forever - in fact there's a good probability we'll be wiped out somewhere in the next 100 000 or so years (maybe even a lot sooner), even if we learn to be at peace with each other. Our planet is constantly threatened from the outside. Space, contrary to popular belief, is not a quiet place. It's a violent, aggressive, lethal zone. I've noticed that even on Discovery Channel they mention this time and time again in their many brilliantly educational series about space, the universe and so on. We need science to come up with answers and it won't happen if we force ourselves back into the scientific stone age.

    I deal with pupils who won't accept the big bang theory. I tell them we have tremendous evidence to support it, as do we have a lot of evidence concerning Earth's age. They claim the evidence is tricked and false. I ask them whether they have a cell phone. They say yes. I ask them to show me the cell phone. They do. I ask them to text someone in class. They do. Then I explain that the same basic laws that govern the functioning of the cell phone, are used to understand the origin of the world and to determine the age of our planet. It confuses them. Some of them intellectually accept what I say yet fight the thought with all the magic they can imagine. They say this is not how the Bible or the Koran explain it. That's the part where I get angry. Though not visibly. I once, in the beginning of my career, spent 45 minutes in class debating the subject with a Muslim boy. I could bring up a gazillion solid arguments, and he came no further than referring to the Koran over and over again. As he had absolutely no case, whereas mine was strong, he left visibly confused. It got me into a lot of trouble with his father, however...
  • Not sure why this is in a Bond forum, but I'll throw in my two cents...

    I can see why someone would want evolution to not be taught in a *religion* class, but to not teach it in a science class is beyond comprehension. Even if you don't believe in it it's an accepted part of science and should be taught as such. If anyone asks that it not be taught in science class because of religious values then I would ask them how they would feel about evolution being taught during sermons in their church. Turnabout is fair play, as we used to say as kids...

Sign In or Register to comment.