Tampa Bay’s Creative Loafing blog Political Animal has a post up entitled School of thought: Florida schools are ripe for potential church-state violations. Of interest to us is this observation:
Science is science. You’d think there wouldn’t be any argument over whether something that’s not based on empirical evidence should be taught in science classes. But creationism still creeps into some classrooms. Obviously if a teacher is discussing religious tenets in the context of a humanities class, that’s one thing. But anyone who thinks Satan put dinosaur bones underground to trick us into thinking the universe’s age exceeds 6,000 years should probably not be teaching science. Or anything at a public school.
“If you’ve got a teacher telling you that creationism is the way and that you need to pray, we will come in there and we will fix that,†Seidel said. “If we can’t fix it, we will sue that school.â€
What a funny post. New books, new clothes, new classmates. But nothing new for science and if you don’t like it we’ll sue ya.
I also liked the line, ‘But anyone who thinks Satan put dinosaur bones underground to trick us’… After reading most of the 50 stupid supposed bible questions on the FFR site, it’s obvious Satan doesn’t have to do anything to trick this guy.
Chris: … nothing new for science …
You don’t follow any science reports at all, do ya?
Hint: Creationism depends on a 2,500-year-old text, and has generated nothing new but sophistries since then.
Pierce,
I do have to admit I haven’t kept up with the latest ideas evolutionist have postulated. But I did make a recent discovery.
I’ve always wondered how your ape like creature ancestors managed to survive after loosing their ability to swing from tree to tree evading predators. Hanging out in the tall grass is said to have helped develop their ability to stand upright, stay on the ground and run. Which brings me to a question I’m sure you can answer.
It is now believed that goosebumps became much larger and were a form of defense before clothing. Goosebumps can appear when we are frightened or angry. So now it all makes sense, just pop out those goosebumps out and freak out those tigers, lions and bears. My question is, how big would goosebumps need to be to scare off a tiger?
Chris, your question gave me goosebumps. This has to be the most stupid question you have ever ask. Please also check out your poor grammer (you used the word “OUT” three times out of nine) where on earth were you home schooled? I wil let Pierce answer, but I know he will just be wasting his time
Ivory girl, I’ve missed you
Sorry about the “OUTS” I had lost some of my composure over this new scientific development.
If evolutionary science has determined that standing in tall grass can radically change the anatomy of an ape like creature and that said creature can developed large goosebumps wile nude for defense purposes, my question is not stupid.
Ivorygirl – I would have to go through a lot of old posts to determine whether this qualifies as the dumbest question Chris has ever delivered himself of, and have neither the time nor any desire to trudge through such murky swamps. At the least, this does merit a place in his scrapbook of lowlights.
Chris: It is now believed that goosebumps became much larger and were a form of defense before clothing. Goosebumps can appear when we are frightened or angry. So now it all makes sense, just pop out those goosebumps out and freak out those tigers, lions and bears. My question is, how big would goosebumps need to be to scare off a tiger?
Please tell us just where you read that, and who wrote it.
Meanwhile, please remember that evolution features competition within each species as well as between species. Consider also that “goosebumps” correlate to the roots of bodily hair, even though we’ve lost most of ours (well, turned off the genetic switches that continue to grow thicker pelts on all the other primates, so that our “fur” stays at an infantile level).
Sit down, hold on tight, take a stiff drink, whatever you need to face the challenge of trying to maintain three thoughts at once, and remember the last time you saw an unfriendly confrontation between a pair of dogs or of cats. Aside from the teeth-baring, tense postures, and exciting sound effects, you probably observed how both sides of the impending battle fluffed out their fur to appear just a bit bigger – part of what ethologists call “threat display”.
Our ape cousins do the same thing in the same circumstances – every little bit helps in an otherwise even match, and a good bluff that prevents a fight might help both sides get through without bloodshed. Guess what – that same reflex (which probably dates back to the – oh no that word! – evolution of hair [also feathers], and has gotten rather hardwired by now) still operates in the modern human body, even without a good thick coat of hair which might make you look an inch or so wider across the shoulders like it did 10^6-great-granddad.
That’s goosebumps for ya – they get triggered by all sorts of stimuli. I didn’t mention that fluffing up like that also provides better insulation, so cold air will do it too – in fact that may have come first. Either way, natural selection, in its long-term gradualist way, often adapts a trait which helps in one situation to serve in others, which produces a wide array of fascinating natural phenomena.
Sometime let’s go into how the fingers which got so nimble brachiating in the forest canopy turned out to improve survival on the savannah, not least by making the use of tools possible and profitable.
Pierce,
All of your points are good. However they are all predicated on hypothetical assumptions necessary to validate the idea. I understand it doesn’t follow the chain of events depicted in artist renderings, but can you show where the nimble fingers of the savannah didn’t evolve to allow these creatures to swing from branch to branch evading predators. I don’t believe this is falsifiable.
Chris – Have I misread you, or did you just concede all my points about (many of) our fellow mammals bristling during confrontations and (sometimes) gaining advantage from it? (Not to mention those about the Bronze Age tribal lore?)
… can you show where the nimble fingers of the savannah didn’t evolve to allow these creatures to swing from branch to branch evading predators.
The savannah, pretty much by definition, has a severe deficiency of swingable-from branches.
Those primates which do live in forested areas do better with a variety of motions and grips to help them brachiate. Do you really need somebody to carry out experiments interfering with monkeys’ paws to demonstrate that?
Yes, you missed it, but that’s ok.
Chris – Nice dodge. Do you wanna say anything relevant to the topics on the table?
Dodge what?
Chris – apologies for yet another lag in replying.
Last week, for reasons unknown,* Thor waxed wroth at my modem and smote it a good one.
I’m finally back online and (mostly) caught up with the intervening loose ends, and so I can tell ya that you dodged all the points regarding evolution on this thread.
*Godhood means never having to explain.
Pierce,
Guess you’ll just have to enlighten me on those dodged points regarding evolution.
Lets recap.
We begin with some dude who claims not to have been tricked by Satan.
Then we have an unidentified 2500 year old deceptive text.
I acknowledge standing in tall grass can make a monkey taller. Goosebumps and tigers.
Ivory girl comes OUT of the closet.
Then we have goosebumps in the nude.
My thoughts find a home in your scrapbook.
And then you start that old naturalist bed time story, long long ago and far far away, my ape ancestors evolved goosebumps, thick hair and nimble fingers for defense purposes. Now without a single real time example of this tale, you’re talking blind faith or pure BS here.
Once again I question the ability to determine whether the monkeys ran to the trees out of the grass or ran from the trees to the grass over millions of years to acquire these changes which step beyond adaptation.
Thor attacks your computer.
And here we are.
Chris – No wonder you don’t get science. You don’t even get dialog.
Chris, you said “Ivory girl comes OUT of the closet”. Not sure how you meant that???? I will actually be out of the closet around March 2016 with my PhD and you have what degree in Science?
Ivory girl, congratulations, a PhD is quite an accomplishment.
Out of the closed does have multiple meanings, sorry about that. You haven’t popped up with any derogatory comments lately. That was my thought.
To be honest, the only degrees I have in science are hot and cold.
Ivorygirl, I read this poem of faith the other day and thought of you. Enjoy.
I once was an ameba in for a swim,
And then I was a tadpole with my tail tucked in.
Then I was a monkey in a banyan tree,
And now I am a professor with a Ph.D.
Chris, I just made this up for you. Enjoy.
Your dull witted ditty just goes to show
How little about science you really know
My PhD will help as a teacher
If I believed in myths I would have become a dumb preacher.
Ivorygirl, good job, you’re inspirational, don’t get me in trouble.
Ignorant teachers become dumb preachers,
When they say all their ancestors were ape like creatures.
As you climb evolution’s imaginary tree,
what you claim to believe no one can see.
Maybe someday an ameba will say,
your brain is like mine, don’t be this way.
As misinformed as you appear to be
your gobbledygook PhD can’t make a flea.
All the crap in the world piled to the sky
barely compares to this big fat lie.
Chris,
That was a brilliant piece of scientific and literary obfuscation; I bet you are so proud of that.
I’m not going to respond, conversing with someone as scientifically illiterate as you will just lower me to your level, then you will beat me with experience.
I’ve tried to see things from your unlettered point of view, but I just can’t get my head that far up my ass.