ron paul..wow

[scottmandue]

Oh yeah... clams will make you crazy... in more ways that one.

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Roflmao!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Moses]

Originally Posted by YTNUKLR

You can't *prove* the theory of evolution *DIRECTLY* in a lab.

Actually, you can. Evolution (heritable genetic mutation leading to natural selection) is fact. Whether or not evolution explains the origin of man is still "theory".

[Rick Lee]

Originally Posted by YTNUKLR

Ron Paul's stance on the theory of evolution is not an uneducated one. Obviously he is not some stupid backwoods religious nut. He is simply skeptical, and I can respect his position (THOUGH I PERSONALLY DON'T AGREE WITH HIM). He is positing a kind of agnosia, or stating that we *CAN'T* know for sure, no matter how many times you prove it in a lab or design an experiment to test it.

You can't *prove* the theory of evolution *DIRECTLY* in a lab. You can have some conclusions about living things that line up extremely well with the theory, but you can never actually prove evolution. It's simply a healthy dose of skepticism.

IMHO, everyone in this country needs this guy. Skepticism is very healthy for a body of citizens. If everyone had been a little more skeptical about going to war in Iraq, maybe we wouldn't be there.

"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."
-Thomas Jefferson

My 2 cents.

Spot on. Your post reminds me of the old joke about Werner Heisenberg. He got pulled over for speeding one day. The cop said, "Do you know how fast you were going? Heisenberg replied, "No, but at least I know where I am." Paul's skepticism on evolution is right in line with the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. We can't know everything. The more precisely you can measure one aspect of a particle, the less so you can measure another aspect of it. Besides, does anyone nowadays do any kind of experiment on evolution to actually find out something new or just to prove what they already believe? I firmly believe in evolution and believe in the tooth fairy more than I do in creationism. But it has nothing to do with anything I care about in politics. I wouldn't ever send my kids to public school and I couldn't care less what is taught there. I wrote public schools in this country off a long time ago and the federal gov't. shouldn't have anything to do with it, not money, not curriculum.

[DARISC]

Surprise, surprise for all the non-scientists:

There are MANY unproved scientific theories upon which science is built. The theory of gravity?

Consider that scientific progress has not been a linear process of building blocks accumulating into a vast body of science. Science is revolutionary and no theory has stood after an anomaly that it could not explain was found.

When this happens, a new theory is developed, to include the anomaly, there is a revolution in the scientific community and the old theory is dropped after much argument and hand-wringing from the scientists whose research may become diminished or useless and whose livelihoods and grants depended on the continued use of the old theory.

This has happened repeatedly in the history of science and will continue to happen as long as scientific research is done. The anomaly that the theory of evolution can't explain has not been found and the theory remains robust and useable, 100% proveable or not.

[Shaun @ Tru6]

now I'm sad I spent those 4 years getting a bio/biochem degree.

[island_dude]

The Theory of Gravity is a liberal fraud. It is part of the MSM trying to rid our people of proper family values. It is only a theory after all and there are many cases where it clearly fails. Obviously, this is proof of "Intelligent Falling", an alternative faith based theory. (Of course is it can only be called a scientific theory if you accept an alternative definition of "theory" that allow supernatural causes).

[legion]

Funny, those of us that are agnostic about the THEORY of man-made global warming are screamed at: "But all of the scientists agree!" (Which they don't.) Some of us are just anticipating the next revolution.

[WI wide body]

Originally Posted by Rick Lee

Spot on. Your post reminds me of the old joke about Werner Heisenberg. He got pulled over for speeding one day. The cop said, "Do you know how fast you were going? Heisenberg replied, "No, but at least I know where I am." Paul's skepticism on evolution is right in line with the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. We can't know everything. The more precisely you can measure one aspect of a particle, the less so you can measure another aspect of it. Besides, does anyone nowadays do any kind of experiment on evolution to actually find out something new or just to prove what they already believe? I firmly believe in evolution and believe in the tooth fairy more than I do in creationism. But it has nothing to do with anything I care about in politics. I wouldn't ever send my kids to public school and I couldn't care less what is taught there. I wrote public schools in this country off a long time ago and the federal gov't. shouldn't have anything to do with it, not money, not curriculum.

Just curious, but are you saying that private schools do not often have the same flaws (albeit in a different vein) that the public schools have?

BTW, I agree with you on the fed gov. not having any input on education. Education is much like politics...in that they are both mostly local.

[DARISC]

[quote=island_dude;3672308]The Theory of Gravity is a liberal fraud./quote]

There are some who refute the theory, claiming the Earth sucks. That's just plumb stewpid (though I sometimes wonder what life was like before they passed the Law of Gravity).

[WI wide body]

[QUOTE=DARISC;3672359]

Originally Posted by island_dude

The Theory of Gravity is a liberal fraud./quote]

There are some who refute the theory, claiming the Earth sucks. That's just plumb stewpid (though I sometimes wonder what life was like before they passed the Law of Gravity).

Yeah, you what they say...gravity is not easy...but it is the law.

[Rick Lee]

Originally Posted by WI wide body

Just curious, but are you saying that private schools do not often have the same flaws (albeit in a different vein) that the public schools have?

BTW, I agree with you on the fed gov. not having any input on education. Education is much like politics...in that they are both mostly local.

Where in the world did I say anything remotely like private schools don't have their flaws? I went to a prep school. I know firsthand. But I'll take those problems anyday over the best public schools, which, BTW, exist where I live now.

[WI wide body]

Originally Posted by Rick Lee

Where in the world did I say anything remotely like private schools don't have their flaws? I went to a prep school. I know firsthand. But I'll take those problems anyday over the best public schools, which, BTW, exist where I live now.

Gee, I dunno, maybe because you said " I wouldn't ever send my kids to public school and I couldn't care less what is taught there. I wrote public schools in this country off..." and that does not come off as a great endorsement of public schools. Thus my question ASKING if you did actually believe that private schools had no flaws.

I had 6 kids and sent them all at various times (too numerous to include) to both public and private schools starting at first grade and on into college. It is my firm belief that a good public school has every bit of the qualities that any private school can offer. Especially in the middle grades and high school.

[Rick Lee]

Originally Posted by WI wide body

Gee, I dunno, maybe because you said " I wouldn't ever send my kids to public school and I couldn't care less what is taught there. I wrote public schools in this country off..." and that does not come off as a great endorsement of public schools. Thus my question ASKING if you did actually believe that private schools had no flaws.

Looks like you got your reading comprehension skills in public school and not in one of the good ones. My bashing public schools in no way implies private schools are flawless. Surely, you can understand that. And having gone to public school until age 14 in a county with some of the best public schools and then having gone off to prep school, I can say with no hesitation that there was simply no comparison in the quality of education between the two. Maybe I just got lucky though, and most other private schools suck and most other public high schools are great. But I wouldn't bet kids' edumacations on it.

[WI wide body]

Originally Posted by Rick Lee

Looks like you got your reading comprehension skills in public school and not in one of the good ones. My bashing public schools in no way implies private schools are flawless. Surely, you can understand that. And having gone to public school until age 14 in a county with some of the best public schools and then having gone off to prep school, I can say with no hesitation that there was simply no comparison in the quality of education between the two. Maybe I just got lucky though, and most other private schools suck and most other public high schools are great. But I wouldn't bet kids' edumacations on it.

Comprehension had nothing do to do with it. You seem blinded to the fact that after you bashed the public schools I simply ASKED you if that's what you thought about private schools. Why does that escape you?

You are correct about some people just being lucky. The inner city schools and those with a lack of parental involvement do seem to have an inordinate amount of problems. Perhaps your experiences in public schools was along those lines and I'm glad that you came though it okay.

Good night.