201. The Art of Creating Controversy Where None Existed

Comment #159897 by black wolf on April 13, 2008 at 11:11 am

rod-the-farmer,
your post reminds me of something that's going on in Germany currently. The renowned author and investigative journalist Guenther Wallraff had heard that certain Imams boasted of their open-mindedness and peaceful intentions. So he decided to help them along the way of enlightening the muslim population by reading Rushdie's 'Satanic Verses' in a mosque. The Imams cringed and refused. Too much enlightenment at once for them, what with the fatwa still hovering like a Damocles sword. Wallraff however wasn't discouraged and offered to do the reading in the mosque's parking lot instead, as that area isn't sanctified and could easily accomodate a great number of listeners. The Imams are still refusing, and Wallraff's still trying to get it on the way, in spite of the death threats he's already received. He has held readings at home to muslim neighbors, achieving "smiles, liberated laughter and thoughtfulness". (Die Zeit, March 26, 2008)

202. Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher

Comment #159801 by black wolf on April 13, 2008 at 7:18 am

...and I know that the expenses of the German Catholic Church are to an overwhelming extent sensible and supportable by any rational person.

203. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #159791 by black wolf on April 13, 2008 at 6:56 am

What to do?
We being all nice to each other, agreeing to disagree whenever the talk gets heated -> we get accused of being circle-jerking cultists
We take on the controverial opinions and let our emotions color the rhetoric -> we get accused of being immature, hate-filled or destructive

We're human. Theism rejects the human mind in its desire to freely express itself. If they want to debate in public, we have many articulate and eloquent people to do that, and they get demolished every time. If they try to stick to the rules of a reasonable discussion, that is. They can go quote-mine this site all they want, do we have to care? I could go to christianforums.com all day and quote mine the discussions they're having on apologetics and theology, throwing nonsense at each other until their ears bleed from the unfounded verbose slime they stuff them with. Would they care?
What is the difference?
The difference is that all the mud-slinging we get into here on this site eventually resolves. The mud dries and crumbles off, and what we have left sticking are good arguments, facts and reason. They have the slime they began with, which they continue to pick up throw around in fear.

204. 'Expelled' ripped off Harvard's 'Inner Life of the Cell' animation

Comment #159495 by black wolf on April 12, 2008 at 10:17 am

Can't wait to see the PBS special on "Exposed On Trail". Ben Stein taking over the cross examination, "Well... are you are aren't you a Nazi?" followed by the killer defense... "Well... it only looks like there video because we wanted them to sue us." ...

205. Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher

Comment #159494 by black wolf on April 12, 2008 at 10:10 am

About the medication thing Bill has going on, I think maybe he's just seen too many celebrities abusing drugs, addicted to pills. Personal experience or first-hand observation of drastic life changes and suffering will always do its work on rationality. Imagine someone witnessing his little son getting hit by an environment-friendly electricity powered car. He'll maybe start thinking that those vile inventions are just too silent and dangerous, and he might develop an irrational aversion to them, and starts talking about the good old days when motors were really noisy.

206. Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher

Comment #159490 by black wolf on April 12, 2008 at 9:58 am

Very enjoyable to watch. It must be pure torture for theists to watch though. I can't recall ever seeing Richard Dawkins in such a relaxed, at moments even silly mood. If that's 'shrill', the Pope can eat his hat.

207. Inadequate, private and late apology with grotesquely inadequate excuse

Comment #159257 by black wolf on April 11, 2008 at 7:06 pm

Comment #159236 by Teratornis on April 11, 2008 at 5:49 pm

I hope instead that atheists can show the way to enlightenment by being the first victim group willing to sacrifice our lives to defend the right of anyone to insult us. What would Voltaire do?

208. Cult leader Pyotr Kuznetsov tries suicide after realising he was wrong about doomsday

Comment #159254 by black wolf on April 11, 2008 at 6:59 pm

From having a look at various recent religiously inspired child killings (thread in the forums), I found that very many of these people try to commit suicide afterwards. I wonder what exactly drives them to attempt to kill themselves. Is it the realization that God did not come to their aid after all? Or is it actual human guilt seeping through the delusion? Has God abandoned them? Are they seeking attention from fellow humans? Are they anticipating or trying to provoke a divine intervention? If they still have strong faith after all the failure, why do they do it in spite of knowing that suicide is a mortal sin? Maybe they are trying to get to hell, or attempting to take the fast track to judgement. Mentally ill people have a remarkable ability to compartmentalize their thinking, so possibly multiple of my speculations are true.

209. Discussion between Richard Dawkins and Paula Kirby

Comment #159253 by black wolf on April 11, 2008 at 6:49 pm

Okay, I bailed out after part 10 after the dumbass old Scottish dude said the stupid crap about prophesy.

210. Inadequate, private and late apology with grotesquely inadequate excuse

Comment #159226 by black wolf on April 11, 2008 at 5:27 pm

1. Her original outburst can be summed up to "Spontaneous Sincerity".

211. The List: The World's Worst Religious Leaders

Comment #159118 by black wolf on April 11, 2008 at 1:11 pm

EvidenceOnly,
adding to your post, it's not only bishops lying, scaring and commanding people away from contraception, there are at least two African cardinals in that line as well. Cardinals are direct subordinates of the Pope. I havent heard that they've even been admonished in the slightest bit by the Vatican.
Japanese CEOs have apologized under tears for incompetent and fraudulent behavior of subordinates.
Governors have resigned over revealed corruption in their administration.
Entire boards of executives of non-profit charities have stepped down from office over solicitation scandals.
From the Vatican: Silence. Crickets chirping. Rolling bushes.
This is the greatest imaginable Fuck You to humanity. EVER.

212. Inadequate, private and late apology with grotesquely inadequate excuse

Comment #159079 by black wolf on April 11, 2008 at 12:19 pm

I've posted about her apology on another comment thread before, so I'll just briefly reiterate here.
- she did not take back one assertion
- she did not take back a single accusation
- she apologized only after receiving at least hundreds of protesting letters and emails
- Sherman accepted the apology for diplomacy's sake, as he's a competitor in the next election
- she needs to be closely watched in the future, and I also recommend to any people in the position to do so to ask her publicly if she thinks the statements she made were un-American, anti-Democratic or un-Christian
- ask her also if she thinks clauses in legislation to deny atheists access to public office are appropriate
- last but not least, she needs to be asked what her opinion of atheists actually is, and if what she said in the hearing still reflects her opinion, and if she has merely chosen to keep this opinion in closed circles or in private in the future for political reasons

213. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #158610 by black wolf on April 10, 2008 at 8:22 pm

It speaketh of etymology, of whiche researche my humblenesse hath founde ye source of ye worde whiche is troll.
And beholde, the great deity Etymology directeth me to ye worde trawl.
And thus verily I speake, ye man of ye name of senility hath been falsifyde.

214. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #158519 by black wolf on April 10, 2008 at 4:46 pm

D.U.mbgenes is what Nietzsche found when he turned his pockets inside out.
Friedrich Nietzsche: "Meine Guete, was ist das denn? Ich sollte es beschreiben. Ich nenne es armselig."

215. Fleabytes

Comment #158515 by black wolf on April 10, 2008 at 4:35 pm

We're not the Borg or a cellular syncytium

216. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #158490 by black wolf on April 10, 2008 at 3:45 pm

Obviously lapro would much prefer people to not to be hypocrites. Okay.
So, lapro, according to your logic Einstein was a hypocrite for not flying to Andromeda with light speed.
Newton was a hypocrite for not jumping off a building.
This woman is not a hypocrite for believing in the Bible and taking the consequences:
http://www.suntimes.com/news/24-7/885008,CST-NWS-stab09.article

217. The simple falsehood at the heart of Expelled

Comment #158486 by black wolf on April 10, 2008 at 3:30 pm

Comment #158417 by Steve Zara on April 10, 2008 at 1:11 pm

I would discourage the use of phrases like this. Natural Selection isn't immoral any more than the weather is.

218. Rep. Davis: The Worst Person in the World

Comment #158481 by black wolf on April 10, 2008 at 3:22 pm

"Rep. Davis said that she had been upset, earlier in the day, to learn that a twenty-second and twenty-third Chicago Public School student this school year had been shot to death that morning. She said that it was wrong for her to take out her anger, frustrations and emotions on me, and that she apologized to me."
http://www.robsherman.com/

I understand that Sherman is politically active, so he accepted the apology diplomatically.
I would not have, if the above words were in fact all she said. That is a nonpology. She should retract every word she said explicitly. I think her apology reveals that she still believes every word of what she said to him. She has only realized that making statements in public which make her look that bad and lead to hundreds of protesting letters are not the way to win the next election. This woman needs to be watched closely until she decides to end her political career.

219. German Church admits aiding Nazis

Comment #158422 by black wolf on April 10, 2008 at 1:19 pm

Falcon, I haven't seen Hitler having a viking funeral mentioned anywhere else before. Where did you get that from?
I know the corpse found was burned with gasoline, but was was 'viking' about that?
According to Rochus Misch, the last remaining radio officer in the Fuehrerbunker, the only order Hitler gave was to be burned. After he had shot himself, they packed him up in horse blankets, carried the body outside and set it on fire.

220. The simple falsehood at the heart of Expelled

Comment #158412 by black wolf on April 10, 2008 at 1:03 pm

This is pretty painfully obvious, I think. Imposing a selection on a population surely isn't natural.

221. The simple falsehood at the heart of Expelled

Comment #158404 by black wolf on April 10, 2008 at 12:50 pm

There are two objections I have against eugenics, which come to my mind right now. 1) to be successful on a humanity or even a nation level, it needs to be mandated. That violates the basic human rights that I believe in, as per the Golden Rule. I don't want to be told who to produce children with, therefore I don't tell anybody else.
2) selective breeding very often leads to hereditary gene defects. If you 'breed' a population in a certain direction, sooner or later defects occur because the genetic similarities become too frequent. As selective breeding is a much faster process than natural evolution, the mutation rate and self-correcting mechanisms on a molecular level can't keep up to weed out the 'damage'. You may suddenly find that you're in a dead end of 'clusterfucked' genes. I'm not a geneticist, but I think I'm getting it about right. Of course we may be able to engineer those genes to a greater advantage some day in the future. It 'feels' morally uncomfortable, but I must admit that a reasonable approach with a tested and safe approach to genetic engineering is something that could be considered.
I would not advocate or support late term abortions (i.e. about later than week 22, which is the currently accepted standard by law in my country) based on eugenic ideas.

That said, if anyone wants to select his personal reproduction partner based on that person's phenotype or genotype, why not. As long as his offspring don't get coerced into doing the same, that's okay.

edit: the bottleneck argument brought up by Jules is another good point, so I would add that to it. We'd have to determine an outlet within one reproductive cycle, which is impossible before we know excactly how basically everything in genetics works.

222. Expelled producers accused of copyright infringement

Comment #158171 by black wolf on April 10, 2008 at 7:05 am

Attorney Peter Irons comments (on Pharyngula article):
"From what I know of the movie business, and what the XVIVO people told me, it would cost the Expelled producers a mint (at least $100K) to recall and remaster all copies before they go to theaters. So they have to choose a) between that cost, b) delaying the film's release, and c) keeping the segment in and risking a lawsuit. XVIVO does have a really good copyright lawyer from a big firm in Boston, so it's not just an idle threat."

223. Expelled producers accused of copyright infringement

Comment #158166 by black wolf on April 10, 2008 at 6:55 am

check this out:
http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/9669/jewlyingforjesuscy8.jpg

Excreted!:Ours is brown!

224. Cult leader Pyotr Kuznetsov tries suicide after realising he was wrong about doomsday

Comment #158153 by black wolf on April 10, 2008 at 6:39 am

A half hour after the game ends, the boy suddenly rocks forward and yells out "KYUUUUUUUU!" (aka "Q"). People realize he's still playing hangman, just reeeeally slowly.

225. Reviews of Expelled

Comment #158109 by black wolf on April 10, 2008 at 4:39 am

I own a few books inherited from my grandparents from the Nazi era (auto-biography of Göring, a small book called 'Little Race Study' etc.). It is clear from those sources that the Nazis systematically replaced unwilling evolutionary biologists and countless other undesirable scientists with more incompetent pseudo-scientists. As long as someone had a high school degree and willingly followed Nazi ideology, he was in basically. They let this kind of person write an essay or two, and he was a scientist. The Nazis didn't care if their scientists produced bogus papers, just as long as they supported them. They re-wrote German history, distorted paleontology and archaeology, and they followed the same path in almost all areas of science. That's what happens when the education system gets subordinated to an unscientific and irrational ideology.

226. Reviews of Expelled

Comment #158091 by black wolf on April 10, 2008 at 4:11 am

Wow, that Fox review is brutal, and rightly so. It also highlights the fact that the movie is scheduled to open mainly in select rural southern theaters, where, the author suspects, the filmmakers are deliberately targeting the not-so-well-educated (gullible?, indoctrinated? - you decide) populace. Who, judging from easily discernable comments on various message boards and blogs, evidently think that an opinion on educational and science matters is what the pastor tells you to think. Any move submitting decisions on the content of any educationial cultural level, to the consciously and proudly displayed herd mentality of that flock is inevitably bound to be un-American, un-democratic and plainly a huge step backward. This must never happen. I applaud Mr. Friedman for his uncompromising and clear-thinking view.
Michael Shermer concentrates on the ID movement itself, as featured in Expelled. All I can say is, if intellectual and general dishonesty were criminal, the mindbogglingly deceitful creationism/ID folk would be stacking up life sentences by now. Shermer: "Unless God reaches into our world through natural and detectable means, he remains wholly outside the realm of science." While this is perfectly true, the creationists declare that God does influence the world, at least by fiddling people's emotions or messing around with DNA. The ID creed is:"we are science as long as we declare this to happen. just give us the money already and we'll find God's tracks for sure". Given that they've stirred the shot glass a bit and have received countless undeserved but nevertheless incredibly patient replies, they know very explicitly that that is not how science works. They know perfectly well that their definition of science would include phrenology, astrology, alchemy and so on. And they also know that real science has moved past these ideas for dozens of decades. Creationism/ID is a direct jump back into the ideological center of 18th century pseudoscience. They are stuck in their narcisstic hubris and want everybody else stuck with them.

227. Richard Dawkins on The Big Questions

Comment #157663 by black wolf on April 9, 2008 at 11:51 am

Could be (I wouldn't say I knew about 'many'). The difference is that the more rationally thinking, intelligent contributors feel the moral obligation to at least try to educate the slow-wits instead of cutting to the commercials. In all cases of pea-brain visits to this site I have observed, it's always the wannabe scholars who get caught in their ideological circularity and then cut and run.

228. Richard Dawkins on The Big Questions

Comment #157645 by black wolf on April 9, 2008 at 11:23 am

Perhaps some form of malodorous gas is the better analogy.

229. Richard Dawkins on The Big Questions

Comment #157638 by black wolf on April 9, 2008 at 11:12 am

...or you will be classified with the above reptillian scum.

230. Richard Dawkins: 'Growth in creationist beliefs a problem for schools'

Comment #157630 by black wolf on April 9, 2008 at 10:58 am

What?
An argument that gets settled by evidence and reason?
WHAT?
Nobody's being told to go to Hell and nobody gets banned?
What is this?
A clear-thinking oasis or something like that?
Is this really what you want the world to be like?
You people must be totally nuts!

231. 'Darwin chip' brings evolution into the classroom

Comment #157584 by black wolf on April 9, 2008 at 9:51 am

Is optimism about the possibly persuasive nature of such a practical demonstration of the mechanisms of evolution appropriate. I think yes. But this 'yes' is not an unconditional affirmation.
What we do know is that die-hard creationists lie, they distort and spin or deny any new development, evidence and research to fit their agenda. Therefore I predict that the first argument against this will be 'haha, this is man-made, so it proves that intelligent creation is necessary to prompt any evolutionary process, and it also proves that evolution can only work if the parameters are determined by an intelligent creator'.
They constantly demand, completely oblivious to logic, that natural evolution be demonstrated before their very eyes, with every single physical change visible from an inorganic molecule to a complete modern organism, i.e. homo sapiens. They are not willing to admit the simple fact that mounting evidence of accumulated variation is logically equivalent to observing every step in sequence. And they are not willing to apply their hypocritical demands to their own biased ideology. The easiest tactical step in their strategy is to put pressure on school boards and science teachers not to mention any fact or undertake any demonstration, such as this chip, that might possibly touch the dogma they wish to implant into all children's minds, and it's already working. All children, not just their own - there's homeschooling for that, but that's not what they're satisfied with. The strategy is the gradual implementation of theocracy. Enough of the completely factual ranting for now.

232. Hitchens vs. Hitchens

Comment #157247 by black wolf on April 8, 2008 at 7:07 pm

After seeing all of it, I conclude that Peter did make one or two good attempts at forming a valid argument. I honestly can't remember them though.
The debate demonstrates that there is still very much more need to educate the public about atheism, humanism, history and science. Many people fear what they don't know.

233. Hitchens vs. Hitchens

Comment #157220 by black wolf on April 8, 2008 at 6:00 pm

I'm still watching.
Believers should really try to avoid the Isaac story. Hmm, they'd need to delete it from the Bible. There is simply no way to justify this story, except when you're a priest king trying to justify your arbitrary totalitarian regime. Or when you try to rationalize your cosmic Stockholm syndrome. Asking a theologian to explain this is like asking a car crash victim to please stop bleeding.
edit: I just got the word "painiseek" from YT for continued commenting. How astonishingly appropriate, almost prophetic.

234. Discussion between Richard Dawkins and Paula Kirby

Comment #157171 by black wolf on April 8, 2008 at 3:49 pm

That's cool. Dawkins expresses my thoughts on the 'Why' question in almost the exact words I've used on this site a while ago. 'Just because a language allows a question to be formed doesn't mean that it's a meanigful question or that it deserves an answer'. Very nice. I sort of feel flattered.
No, I don't think he quoted or paraphrased me. ;)

235. Richard Dawkins: 'Growth in creationist beliefs a problem for schools'

Comment #157120 by black wolf on April 8, 2008 at 3:04 pm

Comment #157080 by yussel123 on April 8, 2008 at 2:39 pm

When did the UN declare that a person shouldn't criticize religion?

236. Anti-evolution bill clears another hurdle

Comment #157105 by black wolf on April 8, 2008 at 2:56 pm

As the bill, contrary to the above substitution of the word 'idea', specifically mentions 'scientific' as a criterium, and as ID/creo have already been officially reckognized as the unscientific religious idea they are, I don't expect ID to make any headway with this.
The ACLU has already vowed to sue anyway.
For the sake of the American student, I hope that someday there will be legislation in your country to implement a general mandatory school attendance instead of homeschooling, given that they also increase funding and generally improve the education quality. Homeschooling may be a practical and working alternative in countries like Austria and Denmark, but in a country like the US, where 70% of homeschooling parents cite religious reasons for their decision, the outcome can only get worse over time.

237. Richard Dawkins: 'Growth in creationist beliefs a problem for schools'

Comment #157038 by black wolf on April 8, 2008 at 1:56 pm

This is starting to become a tad bit clownesque.
"shittest of the shit"
"hot air-blowing dickhead"
Oh, the images.
You guys realize that your increasingly inflationary utilization of vulgarisms doesn't really improve their impact, don't you?

238. In search of the God particle

Comment #156982 by black wolf on April 8, 2008 at 1:05 pm

I couldn't read their comment page beyond this gem, which should be high on the 'darndest things fundies say' list:

If there was such a thing as a "God Particle" as the so called "wisdom" of intellectual man calls it then why is Earth the only planet around that sustains life???? Why is there not life on all other planets in the universe? Or on maybe a few others around? That is my question. I laugh at articles like this. Turn to your bibles and in the first few versus that "God Particle" that you people are so convinced exists talks to you.

Manny, aurora, colorado

239. In search of the God particle

Comment #156976 by black wolf on April 8, 2008 at 1:00 pm

SPS, there was a supervillian on Spider-man that developed superpowers and was able to control black holes. I believe he called himself "The Spot".

240. Richard Dawkins: 'Growth in creationist beliefs a problem for schools'

Comment #156970 by black wolf on April 8, 2008 at 12:50 pm

I second
Comment #156963 by Quetzalcoatl on April 8, 2008 at 12:43 pm
to be fair, I didn't perceive RM's posts as more than a little annoying, but I don't know if I saw all of them. They did come across as somewhat stalkerish.

241. The Atheist Next Door

Comment #156947 by black wolf on April 8, 2008 at 12:27 pm

It's really irrelevant if some people (in the US) become outspoken atheists in reaction to the religious right, or not. What matters is that they have a case, and if the religious right would walk into the ocean never to resurface, the atheist case would be just as valid.

242. In search of the God particle

Comment #156718 by black wolf on April 8, 2008 at 7:28 am

I really like this man. His thinking alone is so much greater than the God theologians have painstakingly painted over centuries.

243. Richard Dawkins: 'Growth in creationist beliefs a problem for schools'

Comment #156709 by black wolf on April 8, 2008 at 7:12 am

Example: We read bed-time stories to our children. Should we stop because they are not exact, scientific descriptions of the world, that would stand up to the scrutiny we use to test scientific theories? Is it "child abuse" to tell a three or four year old a story about "Mother Goose"?

The only inequality left as far as I can see is that I won't gain a title if my partner gets knighted.

244. Get out of here, atheists!

Comment #156699 by black wolf on April 8, 2008 at 6:58 am

I've had a look at Davis' VoteSmart page. I found that I agree with her political leaning on most issues, and she doesn't seem to be a nutter in general at all. I guess that some believers have something like a little compartment in their thought process that they unconsciously shield from reason. When that compartment gets challenged or reaches a point where frustration mounts, they must release the pressure. This release gives the rest of their thinking which remains rational more room to breathe. And then some believers seem to have a more flexible compartment that allows them to accumulate 'nuttiness' to a much higher degree and take over much more of their thinking, bordering or developing into a permanent psychosis.

245. Richard Dawkins: 'Growth in creationist beliefs a problem for schools'

Comment #156686 by black wolf on April 8, 2008 at 6:30 am

We can't compile a failsafe list of arguments that 'just work'. It depends on the individual believer. I've read several deconversion stories from people like Matt Dillahunty (Atheist Community of Austin), who became an atheist after being a fundamentalist preacher for a whopping 25 years. What got through to him was not a single argument or a select few, but the whole process over time of accumulating doubts, unsatisfying and somewhat dishonest answers from his fundy peers, questions from our viewpoint that he couldn't answer, finding out that the allegedly irrefutable points his teachers had taught him were just not so irrefutable, and so on and on. The process takes a few months for some, a few years for most, and decades for then some. As long as we keep throwing, something's gonna stick sometimes.

246. Russell T Davies: Return of the (tea) Time Lord

Comment #156531 by black wolf on April 7, 2008 at 6:48 pm

I'd like to see Richard in 'Heroes'. Wouldn't it be cool seeing him explaining patiently for the dozenth time to Dr. Suresh how evolution really works, then Petrelli comes flying in in plain sight, the Prof. raises an eyebrow and just says 'never mind' and walks out.

247. Cult leader Pyotr Kuznetsov tries suicide after realising he was wrong about doomsday

Comment #156524 by black wolf on April 7, 2008 at 6:31 pm

I dunno. Maybe RM is working on his greatest work of dramatic music yet. Dunno.
I try not to post in anger, even if someone directs unjustified accusations or hate talk at me personally. I usually type out my anger and then reread it, find satisfaction in having it written down, and then delete it and write something better. I've had moments like the one MaxD describes, and had the same afterthoughts he had. Sometimes it's best if you're honest to yourself. People stop being honest when they start channeling their expression of thought into what they think is socially acceptable verbalism. They turn into hypocrites without even noticing. But sometimes it's best to just hold it, especially when you've got no information to add and apparently no one expects a comment from you. Nobody's expected to comment on everything, but some people think they have to.

248. Get out of here, atheists!

Comment #156372 by black wolf on April 7, 2008 at 12:22 pm

Apparently Davis would welcome legislation to mandate a certain 15-20% minority of the population to sit in the back of the bus.
I'm glad that almost all commenters at Eric Zorn's blog (linked above) despise her conduct, apart from one presumably sarcastic all-caps yeller, one disgruntled man Sherman had successfully campaigned against, and one lapdogging Davis follower who didn't even attempt to formulate an argument.

249. Expelled Overview

Comment #156307 by black wolf on April 7, 2008 at 9:47 am

Oh, I'm sure they will manage to achieve their 1000 theater / 100 gazillion revenue goal.
See, if they can't, it was meant as a metaphor all along. They'll have 900 metaphorical theaters and a huuuuuge metaphorical profit, and that makes it true and settles the issue.
I'm off to get my puff now, thanks for reminding me i_a

250. Richard Dawkins: 'Growth in creationist beliefs a problem for schools'

Comment #156266 by black wolf on April 7, 2008 at 8:01 am

Thanks Cartomancer. I did know about the context, but didn't have the exact Niemoeller association in mind. I thought about adapting the original poem to the present situation even more, but I thought that would have been unfair. I settled with a sort of middle-ground paraphrasing just to get my post done.
The ironic thing about it is that it's the creationists who constantly paint themselves as the persecuted whenever their attempts at expansion and legislative influence, as well as educational demands, get thwarted by rational and law-abiding institutions.
I often find the American education system very unsatisfying structurally. I still don't understand why school boards in the US are apparently based more on electing polemically skilled members by the public than taking their academic qualification or experience into account. They often seem to be more like a council of parents who make decisions based on their ideological opinion instead of factual information. What I don't get is why they are the ones entrusted with composing a curriculum, instead of having a select council of actual pedagogically and scientifically informed and experienced experts to do this. It seems to me almost like having a court of law where the judge, lawyers and attorneys all get replaced with randomly chosen juries.