US House Science Committee Member: Evolution Is a Lie From Hell 1113
First time accepted submitter badford writes "Representative Paul Broun (Georgia Republican) said that evolution, embryology and the Big Bang theory are 'lies straight from the pit of hell' meant to convince people that they do not need a savior. It would not be quite as shocking if Broun did not sit on the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology. What impact could this have on policy? What impact could this have on STEM education not just in Georgia but all over the U.S.?"
The Pops is OK with it (Score:5, Informative)
I wonder what he would think of the Pope saying that there is no conflict between the theory of evolution and church doctrine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_evolution#Pope_John_Paul_II [wikipedia.org]
Even more reason (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Why... (Score:4, Informative)
To propose budgets for NASA, the NSF, and the NIH.
To discuss the legality of embryonic stem cell research.
To act as the body that drafts virtually all laws related to science regulation and/or spending.
Are those reasons not good enough for you?
Obligitory XKCD (Score:5, Informative)
http://xkcd.com/154/ [xkcd.com]
Bias like this (Score:5, Informative)
Should invalidate him to serve on that particular committee.
Re:Post bigotry here (Score:2, Informative)
Until their neighbors declared that, due to their majority on the local School Board, evolution, history, a large chunk of geology, and set theory will no longer be taught. And all children will have a compulsory christian values class. ....And if you have a problem with it you are free to set up a completely separate school system on your own.
That doesn't make sense. Having a School Board assumes a public school system, which means that creationism or 'compulsory christian values' cannot be taught (establishment clause). Not having a public school system means private schools which currently exist and can teach whatever they want, and yet for the most part teach proper science and not creationism, So your idea that the moment government steps out of something it will all immediately be taken over by religious nuts is unjustified.
Re:electrion year (Score:5, Informative)
>It's an election year. Don't believe anything they say
He's running unopposed.
It's what he really thinks. He's not pandering.
--
BMO
Re:Big Bang is not against the Bible (Score:4, Informative)
You know that one of the first scientists to consider the Big Bang was.... a Catholic priest (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre)
Re:we need a litmus test (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Post bigotry here (Score:4, Informative)
What's missing? Not enough opportunity for graft? Not enough administrative overhead? No way to use politics to divide people? No union dues and slush funds? No way to censor "bad" ideas? No way to indoctrinate people into your belief system? No way to force bullies and their victims together? No one to tell the parents they're teaching their children wrong? No way for non-teachers to skim money out of the "system"? No one to fill out forms and do compliance paperwork?
...And no one to tell you your oncologist got his medical degree from Dr. Woo's School of Homeopathic Medicine.
Re:Fire him (Score:2, Informative)
Evolution is fact
Evolution is not a fact. Evolution can best be described as a 'manifest' fact derived from a host of theories that support the main hypothesis. There are no direct, reproducible experiments that proves evolution to be fact. All we have are observations as to the likelyhood that evolution is responsible for the diversity and common lineage of life on Earth. To state that evolution is a fact gives morons like Broun and the the idiots that support him more ammunition to support their statements as 'truth'.
Re:Post bigotry here (Score:5, Informative)
There is NO DIFFERENCE between the "two" parties.
Except, you know, when it comes to issues like health care, reproductive rights, or Social Security.
Anyone who says there's no difference between the two parties is either (1) totally uninformed, (2) obsessed with fringe issues and apathetic about everything that the rest of us care about, or (3) trying to convince you to stay out of the election so their vote will count more.
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Re:we need a litmus test (Score:4, Informative)
Hell, even Einstein said he believed in a God who created the universe. His work in the unified theory was an attempt to understand that creator's mind.
Uh, no. In a March 24, 1954 letter, he [Einstein] is quoted as writing, "It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it." In another letter, Einstein wrote the word God was "nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish." I would wager that the vast majority of scientists hold the same opinion. They may have been raised in a religious environment, and might even maintain some traditions of those environs. But actually believe it? I don't think so.
Re:text books shall be accurate (Score:4, Informative)
The problem is that Creationism is a discredited theory: it fails to match so much observed evidence, and fails to predict so many things we've found, that there's no longer any serious possibility that it might be correct. As a scientific theory, it should be chucked out into the dumpster to join Ptolomey's theory of celestial mechanics, phlogiston and a host of other discredited theories. It doesn't even have saving grace of eg. Newtonian mechanics: known to be incorrect, but a sufficiently close approximation for everyday use and much simpler to deal with than the more accurate theories.
Re:Post bigotry here (Score:5, Informative)
You are the one being confused. There is no government in communism and all questions are meant to be decided by grassroots democracy.