4 years of high school? Give at least one semester to "conservative science".

[Katzndogz]

Can the wickens/witches get one semester?

Can the World is Flat crowd have one crack at em too?

They'll get more than that.

And after double maths it will be... paganism: Schools told to put witchcraft and druids on RE syllabus | Mail Online

Paganism has been included in an official school religious education syllabus for the first time.
Cornwall Council has told its schools that pagan beliefs, which include witchcraft, druidism and the worship of ancient gods such as Thor, should be taught alongside Christianity, Islam and Judaism.
The requirements are spelled out in an agreed syllabus drawn up by Cornwall’s RE advisory group.

It says that from the age of five, children should begin learning about standing stones, such as Stonehenge. At the age of 11, pupils can begin exploring ‘modern paganism and its importance for many in Cornwall’.
The syllabus adds that areas of study should include ‘the importance of pre-Christian sites for modern pagans’.


Read more: And after double maths it will be... paganism: Schools told to put witchcraft and druids on RE syllabus | Mail Online

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

4 years of high school? Give at least one semester to "conservative science".

Don't you think that's a good idea? Think of all the scientific achievements waiting to be discovered if only conservatives were given a chance to do "conservative" research?

They could finally present their conservative scientific evidence that evolution isn't the only game in town. They could finally present conservative studies on why humans can't affect the climate.

Then there's "conservative physics".

Conservative geology which presents evidence showing the true age of the earth.

Conservative medicine which disputes the effectiveness of vaccines.

I believe during 4 years of high school, we should have at least one semester of "conservative science" to give young people "choice" as to what they should "believe". What say you?

 

[patrickt]

4 years of high school? Give at least one semester to "conservative science".

Don't you think that's a good idea? Think of all the scientific achievements waiting to be discovered if only conservatives were given a chance to do "conservative" research?

They could finally present their conservative scientific evidence that evolution isn't the only game in town. They could finally present conservative studies on why humans can't affect the climate.

Then there's "conservative physics".

Conservative geology which presents evidence showing the true age of the earth.

Conservative medicine which disputes the effectiveness of vaccines.

I believe during 4 years of high school, we should have at least one semester of "conservative science" to give young people "choice" as to what they should "believe". What say you?

How about just one year of science as opposed to liberal indoctrination. Earthquakes? Oh, right, those are caused by fracking. Global warming? Oh, right, that's caused by you and the sun isn't involved at all. Evolution? Well, since liberals have devolved from humans I would say that proves evolution as a viable theory. DDT? Really, really bad and it's worth 30 million dead people to keep it away from people as long as the dead people aren't in the U.S. or Europe.

I think you might have been trying to be funny6 but you should realize that liberal humor beings and ends with the word tw@t. Ask Bill Maher.

 

[rdean]

Accepting creationism as an absolute fact is as wrong as accepting evolution as an absolute fact. Both must be questioned. Allowing schools to encourage questioning both theories should be encouraged.

Evolution is accepted as a "fact" because of the incredible amount of evidence that supports it. It's not called an "absolute" because new data is always turning up a better understanding, but the premise is the same.

Those that believe in the occult view magical creation as an "absolute" fact because in their lives of the supernatural, mysticism and the occult, there exists spirit beings that are understood to be "absolute".

The two are totally not connected. One deals with the real, substantive world and the other deals with the "unseen" and "unknowable".

Finally some decent shit from your shit-for-brains.

You seem to be describing two extremes and yet in your interminable style you give credence- albeit qualified- to evolution while encumbering the concept of creation with notions of the supernatural, occult, magic, and mysticism. Typical of you to ascribe selective qualifiers.

You state that creation deals with the unseen and unknowable. If there's anything you see or know about creation then please share it with us. Otherwise- leave it as it is.

That being said- do you think you can accept the idea of the creation of the basic physical elements of the universe as a singular event that took place 12 billion years ago (according to scientific estimates)? And would you subsequently agree that the creation of those elements evolved over the succeding 12 billion years into what we are today?

The difference is that scientists figure things out, conservative don't bother. They've already been told what to believe by people dead thousands of years. Conservatives live off the progress of liberals.