lol

unreal. Good for the park to approve the sale of the creationist book though, on the basis of giving people enough credit to form their own beliefs.

It's sad that this concept is still lost on so many

quote:

Originally posted by pmoisse lol unreal. Good for the park to approve the sale of the creationist book though, on the basis of giving people enough credit to form their own beliefs. It's sad that this concept is still lost on so many

Are you being serious? Forming their own beliefs? Even when those beliefs go completely against strong geologic evidence?

I don't give a shit about anyone's beliefs - you can believe in the flying spaghetti monster for all I know. But when a NATIONAL park is not permitted to give an "estimate" of its age as a consequence from pressure from Bush Admin. appointees, this goes beyond the pale of logic.

This is also inexcusable:

quote:

Despite promising a prompt review of its approval for a book claiming the Grand Canyon was created by Noah’s flood rather than by geologic forces, more than three years later no review has ever been done and the book remains on sale at the park.” http://www.attytood.com/2006/12/weird_science.html

Though it's not entirely unexpected considering this Administration's record on science.

___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...

Easy dude, I totally agree that the Administration's stance is completely full of shit. I don't agree with the topic of the book being the biblical creation of the Grand Canyon.

I was more pointing out the tolerance vs. intolerance aspect of the conflicting "belief's". The science guys are at least open to other thoughts, no matter how wrong they may be (are). The religious guys are totally unaccepting of the science version.

I give people enough credit to form whatever beliefs they want. I could n't give a shit what most people believe in. Then again, I'm not a religious person in the least. To each their own.

Also, this is funny coming on the heels of a large chunk of the arctic ice shelf breaking free -> link and the proposal of the US Administration to have the polar bear labelled as endangered -> FOX News link

quote:

Originally posted by pmoisse Easy dude, I totally agree that the Administration's stance is completely full of shit. I don't agree with the topic of the book being the biblical creation of the Grand Canyon. I was more pointing out the tolerance vs. intolerance aspect of the conflicting "belief's". The science guys are at least open to other thoughts, no matter how wrong they may be (are). The religious guys are totally unaccepting of the science version. I give people enough credit to form whatever beliefs they want. I could n't give a shit what most people believe in. Then again, I'm not a religious person in the least. To each their own. Also, this is funny coming on the heels of a large chunk of the arctic ice shelf breaking free -> link and the proposal of the US Administration to have the polar bear labelled as endangered -> FOX News link

Yet take the Bald Eagle off said list...

does this mean we can continue the cull?

___________________
"...End? No, the journey doesn't end here. Death is just another path...one that we all must take.
The grey rain-curtain of this world rolls back, and all change to silver glass...and then you see it...
...white shores...and beyond...the far green country under a swift sunrise."

quote:

“Belief is the death of intelligence. As soon as one believes a doctrine of any sort, or assumes certitude, one stops thinking about that aspect of existence.” - Robert A Wilson

...hope so, theyre damn tasty.

itd make me laugh if it didnt piss me off so much.

ive always been curious about whether the US' constitution & bill of rights actually achieve anything?! i mean, what exactly is the separation of chuch & state protection doing, if it allows this kind of bullshit?

im not nationalistic at ALL, but stuff like this makes me proud to be an australian

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN itd make me laugh if it didnt piss me off so much. ive always been curious about whether the US' constitution & bill of rights actually achieve anything?! i mean, what exactly is the separation of chuch & state protection doing, if it allows this kind of bullshit? im not nationalistic at ALL, but stuff like this makes me proud to be an australian

The problem is not religion, it is activism.

In most cases, only those who are nearly fanatical believers in something will find enough 'balls' to fight for what they believe in, especially if it runs counter to the general feeling of their compatriots.

Because the 'christian fundamentalist' activist have found an ear with policy makers in recent years. Add to that fact that the majority of the thinking populace is less concerned about activism than going about their daily lives and are disenfranchised with the entire process, you get this kind of policy that defies reason.

This is exacerbated by the continuing consolodation of the information readily available to the populace in the media. Not to say that all the media is being run by government censors, but in general the only information that gets sent to the masses is virtually the same regardless of the "bias" the outlet has. Turn on any news station in the US and you will get the same information, sometimes with a slight bent depending on the outlet. But it is almost like they have agreed to all latch onto one sensational story after another, usually one that is largely irrelevant to the state of the world like will miss USA lose her crown, to keep the masses ignorant. It is that effectively forced ignorance that makes those who would normally make reasoned decisions unable to make any decisions rationally due to a lack of information. I have met many supremely intelligent individuals who were so ignorant of the world that it made me want to vomit. Sometimes their ignorance was by choice, but many times it was created by a lack of will to go beyond the yellow journalism now prevalent in the USA.


MrS

___________________
Click the sig to see MrSquirrel

-"Reality" is the only word in the language that should always be used in quotes.

quote:

Originally posted by pmoisse lol unreal. Good for the park to approve the sale of the creationist book though, on the basis of giving people enough credit to form their own beliefs. It's sad that this concept is still lost on so many

LOL

So you're saying that if we can accurately guesstimate and acquire data on things such as the age of the grand canyon, we shouldn't give that information to people?

Because they might want to... randomly guess the age themselves?

Because if the nutjobs can't gather their own data, we shouldn't introduce data that might injure their cause?

Because.. what?

I'm not following your logic. At all.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN im not nationalistic at ALL, but stuff like this makes me proud to be an australian

I'd be real wary of that

quote:

And documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act demonstrate the Brethren's efforts over 15 years to bend the Family Court and the Federal Government to its will, in the hope of keeping lapsed Brethren away from their children.

SMH report on sect involvment in politics #1
SMH report on sect involvment in politics #2

Interesting and a bit of a worry when extremist christians start pressuring federal politicians and institutions down this way in Aust and NZ

quote:

Originally posted by MrSquirrel usually one that is largely irrelevant to the state of the world like will miss USA lose her crown, to keep the masses ignorant. MrS

i loled.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby LOL So you're saying that if we can accurately guesstimate and acquire data on things such as the age of the grand canyon, we shouldn't give that information to people? Because they might want to... randomly guess the age themselves? Because if the nutjobs can't gather their own data, we shouldn't introduce data that might injure their cause? Because.. what? I'm not following your logic. At all.

I'm sorry, I didn't think it sounded vague. I'm saying that both books (in this case) should be allowed to be sold in the park office, just like the Park Service advocated. If you put the two books on the shelf side by side, I'm going to pick the one based on science, not creationism. I might pick up the creationist one just for a little laugh, but I wouldn't buy it in order to learn from it.

Someone who believes in creationism might do the opposite that I did, and that's their choice to do so. Allowing the sale of the two books is a good thing, no matter how fruity I personally believe creationist theory is, especially in relation to the creation of the Grand Canyon (as in this current example).

In the end though, I do not put any stock in creationist theory, but I'm not going to stop any one from researching it on their own. I do have a problem when it is imposed to be taught in schools. I don't like that one bit, because the little kids being taught that don't have the choice to decide between learning the science or the fruity religious theory (that also cannot be proven).