The Shrine

<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '><b>Link:</b> <a href="http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f ... reationism lite to be taught in schools</a>

Further evidence that the education system is the US is getting farked</div>

<div style='font: 10pt verdana; text-align: left; padding: 0% 10% 0% 10%; '>The current (or at least recent) National Geographic has a great feature article that starts off with "Was Darwin wrong?" [turn page] "NO." Then talks about the wealth of evidence in favor of evolution.</div>

<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>Well, at least they're not teaching the the universe as geocentric =)</div>

<div style='font: 11pt arial; text-align: left; '>AAAAAAAAAAUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHH!!!!1111SHIFTONE</div>

<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>Does that really matter? Since when does a wealth of evidence mean you win?</div>

<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>Are you going to deny that all life upon Gods Green Earth was derived from something other than Gods own will? Blasphemy!</div>

<div style='font: 10pt verdana; text-align: left; padding: 0% 10% 0% 10%; '>In conjunction with cover story they did two months ago saying that yes, global warming is happening and the effects can be seen, I think National Geographic was taking a stand in favor of scienctific consensus (and there is a huge scientific consensus in favor of global warming and evolution).</div>

<div style='font: 11pt ; text-align: left; '>Case in point it was a nice 85 degreez or so yesterday in New Orleans, it only really gets cold at night.</div>

<div style='font: 11pt arial; text-align: left; '>Uhhh....always. That's how science works. It's just that "winning" doesn't imply any sort of absolute stranglehold over the truth, just that your theory currently makes the most reliable predictions.</div>

<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>I think very scientifically, I was referring to the real world, the social world</div>

<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>*looks outside, sees snow on the ground*</div>

<div style='font: 10pt verdana; text-align: left; padding: 0% 10% 0% 10%; '>You can't use the temperature of a single city to support GLOBAL warming. You need global data, or local phenomenon that is a result of global trends (erosion, glaciers melting).</div>

<div style='font: 11pt arial; text-align: left; '>Well, if you're saying that what people believe isn't necessarily based on evidence or scientific consensus, then, okay, I agree.</div>

<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>That is the message I was attempting to convey. Still working on my communication skills :-)</div>

<div style='font: 10pt "EngraversGothic BT", "Copperplate Gothic Light", "Century Gothic"; text-align: left; '>Was this article factoring in water vapor? What a lot of global warming theorists are missing is data on water vapor, which is the causing factor by 95%, not CO2 and methane.</div>

<div style='font: 10pt "EngraversGothic BT", "Copperplate Gothic Light", "Century Gothic"; text-align: left; '>"The U.S. Supreme Court in 1987 banned the teaching of creationism -- which holds that God created the world about 6,000 years ago -- in public schools on the grounds of separation of church and state." Did not know that. At least we're making some progress on that end.</div>

<div style='font: 10pt "EngraversGothic BT", "Copperplate Gothic Light", "Century Gothic"; text-align: left; '>Or that Columbus discovered the world to be round. Oh wait...they are still teaching that.</div>

<div style='font: 10pt verdana; text-align: left; padding: 0% 10% 0% 10%; '>It's a subtle distinction. If greenhouse gases, using your numbers, are responsible for only 5% of the greenhouse effect, increasing the amount of those gases in our atmosphere can still have a huge effect. And that we are increasing those numbers is a fact; we've been doing it since the industrial revolution.</div>

<div style='font: 10pt georgia; text-align: left; '>I wasn't taught that in high school.</div>

<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>This is creationism repackaged. There basically is no difference, just some "updated" arguments</div>

<div style='font: 10pt "EngraversGothic BT", "Copperplate Gothic Light", "Century Gothic"; text-align: left; '>Of course, but it does show that the Supreme Court at least somewhat understands science.</div>

<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>I guess, although you can hardly call them champions of change (the basis of science)</div>

<div style='font: 10pt verdana; text-align: left; padding: 0% 10% 0% 10%; '>Change is the basis of science?</div>