Bible study rules for public schools ...

Bible study rules for public schools proposed

There are 142309 comments on the The Courier-Journal story from Feb 10, 2010, titled Bible study rules for public schools proposed. In it, The Courier-Journal reports that:

FRANKFORT, Ky. - The state would create rules for teaching about the Bible in public high schools under a bill filed Monday by three Democratic senators.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Courier-Journal.

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#109452 Aug 1, 2013
curious wrote:
<quoted text>
That allegation from one who goes to the SPCA for his yearly Psychiatric evaluation......
They got a special this week...You and your cat $25.00
They will accept food coupons as payment.
My cat came home on his own without my pleading for a hocus pocus sign from the ether. Looks like we're both more stable than a certain mental curiosity.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#109453 Aug 1, 2013
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure. I'm being hyperbolic, to some degree. Of course some people include religious elements in their Christmas celebrations. But I don't, and virtually all of the commercial Christmas stuff leaves it out.
My point is that the holiday is owned by everyone in Western culture. It is not limited to Christians and doesn't have anything to do with Christ for all practical purposes.
That's how these things evolve. We still call Thursday by a name that honors a god nobody believes in anymore.
Thor's day.
Funny how many Christians claim their religion came before all others,yet they use the gods of the past in their day to day language.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#109454 Aug 1, 2013
Yes and Amen wrote:
<quoted text>"only religion can help alcoholism"
I claimed NO such thing!
If you cannot tell the truth... just don't speak!
It is a KNOW fact that Religious based programs are FAR more effective than secular programs!
Check it out before you post... IF you want to be Truthful!
Not sure where I would find such information, but you claimed it as if you have seen some stats, so show them. The onus of evidence is upon you who claimed it.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#109455 Aug 1, 2013
curious wrote:
<quoted text>
Science says you are wrong;
Bird-From-Dinosaur Theory of Evolution Challenged::
Feb. 10, 2010 — A new study just published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences provides yet more evidence that birds did not descend from ground-dwelling theropod dinosaurs, experts say, and continues to challenge decades of accepted theories about the evolution of fli
A new analysis was done of an unusual fossil specimen discovered in 2003 called "microraptor," in which three-dimensional models were used to study its possible flight potential, and it concluded this small, feathered species must have been a "glider" that came down from trees. The research is well done and consistent with a string of studies in recent years that pose increasing challenge to the birds-from-dinosaurs theory, said John Ruben, a professor of zoology at Oregon State University who authored a commentary in PNAS on the new research.
The weight of the evidence is now suggesting that not only did birds not descend from dinosaurs, Ruben said, but that some species now believed to be dinosaurs may have descended from birds.
Almost 20 years of research at OSU on the morphology of birds and dinosaurs, along with other studies and the newest PNAS research, Ruben said, are actually much more consistent with a different premise -- that birds may have had an ancient common ancestor with dinosaurs, but they evolved separately on their own path, and after millions of years of separate evolution birds also gave rise to the raptors. Small animals such as velociraptor that have generally been thought to be dinosaurs are more likely flightless birds, he said.
"Raptors look quite a bit like dinosaurs but they have much more in common with birds than they do with other theropod dinosaurs such as Tyrannosaurus," Ruben said. "We think the evidence is finally showing that these animals which are usually considered dinosaurs were actually descended from birds, not the other way around."
Another study last year from Florida State University raised similar doubts, Ruben said.
In the newest PNAS study, scientists examined a remarkable fossil specimen that had feathers on all four limbs, somewhat resembling a bi-plane. Glide tests based on its structure concluded it would not have been practical for it to have flown from the ground up, but it could have glided from the trees down, somewhat like a modern-day flying squirrel. Many researchers have long believed that gliders such as this were the ancestors of modern birds.
"This model was not consistent with successful flight from the ground up, and that makes it pretty difficult to make a case for a ground-dwelling theropod dinosaur to have developed wings and flown away," Ruben said. "On the other hand, it would have been quite possible for birds to have evolved and then, at some point, have various species lose their flight capabilities and become ground-dwelling, flightless animals -- the raptors. This may be hugely upsetting to a lot of people, but it makes perfect sense."
In their own research, including one study just last year in the Journal of Morphology, OSU scientists found that the position of the thigh bone and muscles in birds is critical to their ability to have adequate lung capacity for sustained long-distance flight, a fundamental aspect of bird biology.
So the study shows the likelihood is a common ancestor? Well that is still evolution and is not really inconsistent with what the previous science was claiming.
Seeing as how Archeopteryx dates back to the days long before T-rex was extinct, this makes sense.
Science changes with new evidence. That is the beauty of science. And this is taught when teaching evolution. Any good teacher will present the claims as, this is what science has found to date.
So far, all new evidence shows evolution is how the history of life existed on planet earth. The details may change, but this does not show the theory in general as wrong.

“Speaker of Mountain Wisdom....”

Since: Jan 10

Manchester, KY

#109457 Aug 1, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
Wonder why organisms didn't evolve into dinosaurs again?
Maybe they will... Evolution never stopped... All that's needed is a event the wipes most life on the planet and change the environment significantly and wait a few million years.... Changes in species would happen rather quickly if the environment changed drastically, The more drastic the change to more quickly evolutionary changes happen...

Give you an example...

Say the planet gets smacked with a asteroid that had an abundance of highly radioactive isotopes and caused the earth to have radiation levels 100 times today's levels.... Most life would die in the impact and over time other life would die out that could not survive the increased radiation.... But there would be some life forms that not only survive but Thrive in the new high radiation environment... The radiation would cause fast mutational process and there would be vast regions without predators that the various mutations would begin to fill all the niches .... We have no way of knowing what the results of such would be in a 100 million years... You could have 20 foot long cockroaches and 6,000 lb spiders building spaceships...

“There is no god.”

Since: Jan 12

USA

#109459 Aug 1, 2013
Quantummist wrote:
<quoted text>
Maybe they will... Evolution never stopped... All that's needed is a event the wipes most life on the planet and change the environment significantly and wait a few million years.... Changes in species would happen rather quickly if the environment changed drastically, The more drastic the change to more quickly evolutionary changes happen...
Give you an example...
Say the planet gets smacked with a asteroid that had an abundance of highly radioactive isotopes and caused the earth to have radiation levels 100 times today's levels.... Most life would die in the impact and over time other life would die out that could not survive the increased radiation.... But there would be some life forms that not only survive but Thrive in the new high radiation environment... The radiation would cause fast mutational process and there would be vast regions without predators that the various mutations would begin to fill all the niches .... We have no way of knowing what the results of such would be in a 100 million years... You could have 20 foot long cockroaches and 6,000 lb spiders building spaceships...
......And the spiders will have a god that created them in its own image.....

“There is no god.”

Since: Jan 12

USA

#109461 Aug 1, 2013
"yes the liar"
"the nAzi SoZi"
"bicurious"
"dimwit"
"7th rump"

Must all be the same religie. Odds are very much against 5 religies with the IQs of 3 finding the same topics thread at the same time.
JUST SAYING

Atlanta, GA

#109462 Aug 1, 2013
WHY

“There is no god.”

Since: Jan 12

USA

#109463 Aug 1, 2013
Quantummist wrote:
<quoted text>
I understand since you don't understand the science it seems like magic to you... Just like some kid that watches Cris Angel float in the air or slide a quarter under his skin might be amazed and stunned at the magic, but those that study it know their is no Magic involved, all can be explained within the simple laws of ordinary physics and some psychology ....
No I was speaking of actually Magically turning water into an alcoholic beverage without the required sugar, fruit, fermentation process... Actually walking on the surface of water without wires and underwater clear planks, Actually producing food for hundreds from a couple of fish and a loaf of bread without a stash under the false basket bottom... And the dozens of other claims to Magic stated over time... Magic is doing something Super naturally that Actually breaks the laws of Physics ... None of the mentioned scientific theories do that, therefore they are not Magic, just beyond your knowledge base....
Its not magic to the religies their faith is based on "poof".

“Question, Explore, Discover”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#109464 Aug 1, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
It's all about scope. In my example, there would be some that did not know someone made the toy.
Who says the watchmaker is a fallacy? Things work together too complex to have happened by chance. The way the human body works, the solar system, rain, seasons, foliage, all these things work together very well, by chance?
It doesn't matter if nobody knew how kinetic balls are made. You cannot assume something that you don't have a reason to assume. You cannot assume a deity, for example, when we have no examples or evidence for a deity.

Anything else is wishful thinking.

The watchmaker fallacy is well known. Your assertion that things are too complex to have arisen by "chance" is a fallacy. It is both a lack of imagination and an argument from ignorance.

You need to research that stuff. The whole idea of "irreducible complexity" has been completely refuted by science many times over. It is a dead end idea.
curious

Ocoee, FL

#109465 Aug 1, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>So the study shows the likelihood is a common ancestor? Well that is still evolution and is not really inconsistent with what the previous science was claiming.
Seeing as how Archeopteryx dates back to the days long before T-rex was extinct, this makes sense.
Science changes with new evidence. That is the beauty of science. And this is taught when teaching evolution. Any good teacher will present the claims as, this is what science has found to date.
So far, all new evidence shows evolution is how the history of life existed on planet earth. The details may change, but this does not show the theory in general as wrong.
All that proves is that, again, as usual, they are wrong.

“Question, Explore, Discover”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#109466 Aug 1, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
Your examples only mean that we don't have scientific evidence to support these claims. It doesn't mean it didn't or couldn't happen. It doesn't even mean it isn't probable. If I am right in the things I have said, this is on purpose. We are here to test our faith and receive a physical body to continue our progression. With proof, there is no room for faith, so this important part of our earthly existence would be wasted.
Man, I wish you could read your own words from a rational perspective.

You are basically saying that if we don't have concrete evidence *against* something being true it means that it could be true, possibly even probable. OK. If what you're talking about is something we have experience with, such as sunrises and hurricanes, then yes. But if you are talking about magic (and these Biblical stories ARE about magic) then no. You are wrong. It is certainly NOT probable that Jesus rose from the dead, breaking all witnessed and understood limitations of living creatures. It is not probable that Noah herded up millions or even thousands of animals two-by-two onto a giant boat he built with his family.

These things are myths. They did not really happen and there is no good reason whatsoever to think they did.

By your logic I could substitute any crazy idea I wanted and be just as rational, just as likely to be correct as you are. I could say that Martians are observing Earth and planning an attack. We just can't detect them because they block all attempts to be detected. You can't prove me wrong, can you?

“Question, Explore, Discover”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#109467 Aug 1, 2013
Quantummist wrote:
<quoted text>
Maybe they will... Evolution never stopped... All that's needed is a event the wipes most life on the planet and change the environment significantly and wait a few million years.... Changes in species would happen rather quickly if the environment changed drastically, The more drastic the change to more quickly evolutionary changes happen...
Give you an example...
Say the planet gets smacked with a asteroid that had an abundance of highly radioactive isotopes and caused the earth to have radiation levels 100 times today's levels.... Most life would die in the impact and over time other life would die out that could not survive the increased radiation.... But there would be some life forms that not only survive but Thrive in the new high radiation environment... The radiation would cause fast mutational process and there would be vast regions without predators that the various mutations would begin to fill all the niches .... We have no way of knowing what the results of such would be in a 100 million years... You could have 20 foot long cockroaches and 6,000 lb spiders building spaceships...
Michael Bay would pay you fifty dollars for that movie idea. But he'd ruin it.

Despite our obvious philosophical and personal differences you and I do agree pretty much entirely regarding evolution.

“There is no god.”

Since: Jan 12

USA

#109468 Aug 1, 2013
Truth is tough on religies, it drives them nuts, lol.
curious

Ocoee, FL

#109472 Aug 1, 2013
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>
Michael Bay would pay you fifty dollars for that movie idea. But he'd ruin it.
Despite our obvious philosophical and personal differences you and I do agree pretty much entirely regarding evolution.
Yup, There is much about Evolution and Atheism that belong in Japanese Science Fiction movies...
You guys woulda loved Fred Sanford ... And his son...
The big Dummy

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#109473 Aug 1, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>Wash your mouth out. Just because 2+2 doesn't equal 5 doesn't mean it equals 6.
Haha

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#109474 Aug 1, 2013
curious wrote:
<quoted text>

Necessity is the mother of invention and there are those who need to invent the unbelievable in order to justify the ludicrous
You mean like the men who claimed to speak to a god in order to control their people?

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#109479 Aug 1, 2013
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow...you just plagiarized the Institute for Creation Research.
http://www.youroriginsmatter.com/conversation...
"It's fashionable today to claim that birds evolved from dinosaurs, although there is little agreement on which dinosaur lineage was ancestral to birds. Also, birds and dinosaurs differ completely—legs had to become wings and scales had to become feathers. Dinosaurs had solid bones, yet bird bones are hollow. Reptilian dinosaurs were likely cold blooded, and birds are warm blooded with an extremely high metabolism. Dinosaurs had lungs similar to mammals, while the bird breathing scheme is totally different. At least dinosaur eggs were similar to birds’ eggs internally. Externally, they had a soft, leathery shell, which was quite different from bird eggs."
I mean...if you're going to post someone else's EXACT WORDS at least cite the source and link to it. And for pete's sake...chose an intelligent source. The ICR is not considered to be remotely intelligent or worth quoting by anyone with more than two brain cells to rub together.
They believe the earth is 6000 years old and a talking snake told a woman to eat fruit. They are, in a word, nutters.
If someone else already called you out on this I'm sorry to repeat but it's worth it anyway.
Now we know why Curious never posts his sources. How are we to take it up with them if he does not show the source?

“Speaker of Mountain Wisdom....”

Since: Jan 10

Manchester, KY

#109480 Aug 1, 2013
LOL in a suit wrote:
<quoted text>
......And the spiders will have a god that created them in its own image.....
Yup, that seems to be the norm....

“Speaker of Mountain Wisdom....”

Since: Jan 10

Manchester, KY

#109481 Aug 1, 2013
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>
Michael Bay would pay you fifty dollars for that movie idea. But he'd ruin it.
Despite our obvious philosophical and personal differences you and I do agree pretty much entirely regarding evolution.
Yea but in time you will come around to the light side....

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Barbourville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Randy smith and Shelia 25 min haha 8
City school buying Lynn camp schools 38 min Gary williams 5
Stephen Trace Signs 48 min Sick 18
~~Keep A Word~~Drop A Word Game. (Jun '10) 1 hr want to know 818
{keep a word drop a word} (Oct '11) 1 hr want to know 3,796
Tony Mills and his women 1 hr goodforher 12
Yard Sale 1 hr Coalport53 7
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Barbourville Mortgages