Texas Board Passes Social Studies Curriculum

Status
Not open for further replies.
saywhatkid said:
What a thread....we have discussed...social studies---abortion---Creationism vs evolution---nano engines---. Where to next?
Click to expand...

Obama.
 
Set thrusters to warp speed, that's what's next saywhat.
 
Spirited Exchanges at Senate Republican Lunch With Obama - NYTimes.com


This is outrageous. Obama is a moron, I can't believe he went to go have lunch today with senator Gainer. Couldn't he have gone and get the gulf situation looked at?

I can't believe this.
Shows you how much of a president he is, fancy enjoying his damn lunch while more birds are soaked in oil than Colonel Sanders has ever done in his lifetime.
 
naisho said:
Poll: Obama’s approval rating hits record low | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment

Now look at this. Obama's ratings are record DROPPING. You get that! Yes, it's no doubt approval ratings of him are dropping cause he's not doing anything about the oil.

I strongly disagree with his course of actions.
We ought to impeach this dolt.

Tomorrow I'm going to go rally it up and protest at the oval office. Who's with me?
Click to expand...
Whoa.....looks like you have been "saved" by the Tea Party movement. :giggle:
 
Jiro said:
according to mathematic formula..... we get an "Einstein" every 100-150+ years so that means we'll have an Einstein in around 2050's :aw:
Click to expand...
Who was the "Einstein" before Albert?
 
Reba said:
Who was the "Einstein" before Albert?
Click to expand...


I am the " Einstein" after Albert. I was born premature.....oops


I would like to take this time to say......good morning.....but I digress

:)
 
Reba said:
Who was the "Einstein" before Albert?
Click to expand...

well depending on what field but I'll name many. You can either agree or disagree with me :)

Tesla, Darwin, Freud, Copernicus, Da Vinci, Aristotle, Socrates, Archimedes, Euclid, Pythagoras, Confucius, Kepler, Newton, Pascal, Mozart, Galilei, Shakespeare, Bill Gates, etc....

but on same level as Albert Einstein? I'd say Isaac Newton. or maybe Da Vinci?
 
naisho said:
You're one to say. I don't see you offering anything except "I don't know", "GUYS, Look at these nano-engines!", and "THIS IS so crazy that everything is connected to each other."

Versus something that could be plausible instead of "I don't know."

I don't offer any opinion aside from a formulated theory previously mentioned because I don't believe I am accredited to making assumptions, even my own, which you keep implying that everyone is entitled to share. To say that it is "uncomfortable for some people to really think and delve" shows a lot of your personal reflection on it, did you think about that? What've you offered to the table?

Like I said, it begins with asking questions. You can make your own conclusion if you use the scientific method using only known scientific facts and inductive reasoning. Not an impossible feat.

You're taking it way too personal here, take a chill-pill and eat some ice cream, you can have a free corner time-out if you don't want to offer your own theories. All I have done so far in this thread is explain that your thoughts about what you call "nano-engines" have a more generic term which you kept refusing to acknowledge.

So, explaining scientific method using only known scientific facts and inductive reasoning is getting personal? How? And, oh, offer my own answer when I asked you the question first? But you avoided the question and danced around it saying "I'm not qualified to answer it." My answer is that what I've found points to an Intelligent Designer. As for the "nano-engine" that's basic description of it. Where have I denied it's not a generic term? I already said it makes the envisioning easier, inclusive of the pictures that describes it.

Not everyone has something to share with you, bud.

And I'm the one who has to "chill?" Might want to revisit your posts again.
Click to expand...


..
 
Reba said:
It's not fear, it's fact. Every time a discussion touches on religion the thread gets locked. Do you deny that?
Click to expand...

Yep. I've seen numerous threads "touch" on religion and not get locked.
 
souggy said:
I am not denying they are creationists; I just haven't met one that believed in the literal interpretation of the Bible because the math didn't add up for them.
Click to expand...

Exactly. There is a secular theory of creationism, and then there is the religious interpretation of creationism. One is based on scientific probability, the other is based on myth. Therein lies the difference.
 
naisho said:
Uh, ok man. I don't know what you are on but you got to stop toking on it.
I don't even know if you have ever seriously taken microbiology courses but it is crystal black-and-white clear to me the way you describe the fuctions of cellular motility and movement is that of someone with little or no relevant background.

It's not the time to play armchair microbiologists, the image you provided is a snap up of E. coli's flagella. If you want to get "koko-technical" they are not called "engines", "gears", "shaft", they are labeled on your picture for you. The filament, the hook and body as the major structures.

You are breaking down the flagella into ultrastructures by calling it "nano-engine", while I am still calling it a flagella because.. that's what it is. The flagella can be measured in micrometers and usually on it's full length, is within single or double digit micrometers ESPECIALLY for E. coli.

You don't tell someone "Hey come take a look the engine, steering wheel, drive shaft, axels and wheels I bought" (unless you honestly do), you just simply say "Come look at the car I bought".

Finally, generic species of native E. coli have only 1 flagella. Even in that picture, it's only one. To label it as "flagellum" implies there is more than one, which is false.
Click to expand...

Busted. I do believe we have someone here who not only claims scientific knowlege and expertise, but can demonstrate it, as well.:lol:
 
naisho said:
Spirited Exchanges at Senate Republican Lunch With Obama - NYTimes.com


This is outrageous. Obama is a moron, I can't believe he went to go have lunch today with senator Gainer. Couldn't he have gone and get the gulf situation looked at?

I can't believe this.
Shows you how much of a president he is, fancy enjoying his damn lunch while more birds are soaked in oil than Colonel Sanders has ever done in his lifetime.
Click to expand...

He should have been in the Gulf with a bottle of Dawn cleaning the poor birdies up!
 
jillio said:
Yep. I've seen numerous threads "touch" on religion and not get locked.
Click to expand...
Those are the threads that make negative or mocking mentions of religion. When Christians begin to quote Scripture in their posts, then the threads get locked.
 
jillio said:
Exactly. There is a secular theory of creationism, and then there is the religious interpretation of creationism. One is based on scientific probability, the other is based on myth. Therein lies the difference.
Click to expand...
This is the kind of post I'm talking about.

One poster is allowed to refer to other posters' religious belief as myth, and that is acceptable. If another poster wants to quote Scripture or talk about God, that is not acceptable (for "locking" standards).
 
Reba said:
Those are the threads that make negative or mocking mentions of religion. When Christians begin to quote Scripture in their posts, then the threads get locked.
Click to expand...

That's because of the nature of the comments when Scripture is being quoted. There is a difference between a discussion and preaching.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top