i went to a catholic school all the way until 7th grade. I never got to a point where I needed to learn anything about evolution really.

But if you attend a private university, ie Villanova, then I don't feel sorry for you if you are required to take a christian course. If you don't like it, then don't apply to the school.

I was practically forced to go to a COE high school by my parents (my mum went to the same school) it was a good school, but they forced you to go to church services almost every week whilst at school.

yep, we had a church that was across the street. Every Weds we'd attend the 8am mass.

[quote:e4f55]Evolution? We Don't Need No Stinkin' Evolution
By Staff and Wire Reports
Aug 11, 2005, 03:08


After months of debate over science and religion, the Kansas Board of Education has tentatively approved new state science standards that weaken the role evolution plays in teaching about the origin of life.

The 10-member board must still take a final vote, expected in either September or October, but a 6-4 vote on Tuesday that approved a draft of the standards essentially cemented a victory for conservative Christian board members who say evolution is largely unproven and can undermine religious teachings about the origins of life on earth.

"We think this is a great development ... for the academic freedom of students," said John West, senior fellow of the Discovery Institute, which supports intelligent design theory.

Intelligent design proposes that some features of the natural world are best explained as products of a considered intent as opposed to a process of natural selection.

The board is sending its drafted standards to a Denver-based education consultant before a final vote, planned for either September or October.

If they win final approval, Kansas will join Minnesota, Ohio and New Mexico, all of which have adopted critical analysis of evolution in the last four years.

The new science standards would not eliminate the teaching of evolution entirely, nor would they require that religious views, also known as creationism, be taught, but it would encourage teachers to discuss various viewpoints and eliminate core evolution theory as required curriculum.

Critics say the moves are part of a continuing national effort by conservative Christians to push their views into the public education process.

"This is neo-creationism, trying to avoid the legal morass of trying to teach creationism overtly and slip it in through the backdoor," said Eugenie Scott, executive director of the National Center for Science Education.

Kansas itself has been grappling with the issue for years, garnering worldwide attention in 1999 when the state school board voted to de-emphasize evolution in science classes.

That was reversed in 2001 with new members elected to the school board. But conservatives again gained the majority in elections in 2004, leading to the newest attacks on evolution.

The science standards the board is revising act as guidelines for teachers about how and what to teach students.

In May, the board of education sponsored a courtroom-style debate over evolution that saw lawyers for each side cross-examining "witnesses" and taking up issues such as the age of the earth, fossil records and beliefs that humans and are too intricately designed to not have a creator.

The hearings came 80 years after evolution was the subject of the famous "Scopes" trial in Tennessee in which teacher John Thomas Scopes was accused of violating a ban against teaching evolution.

© Copyright 2005 by Capitol Hill Blue[/quote:e4f55]

What a crock.

[quote:bbc93]KANSAS CITY, KS—As the debate over the teaching of evolution in public schools continues, a new controversy over the science curriculum arose Monday in this embattled Midwestern state. Scientists from the Evangelical Center For Faith-Based Reasoning are now asserting that the long-held "theory of gravity" is flawed, and they have responded to it with a new theory of Intelligent Falling.

"Things fall not because they are acted upon by some gravitational force, but because a higher intelligence, 'God' if you will, is pushing them down," said Gabriel Burdett, who holds degrees in education, applied Scripture, and physics from Oral Roberts University.

Burdett added: "Gravity—which is taught to our children as a law—is founded on great gaps in understanding. The laws predict the mutual force between all bodies of mass, but they cannot explain that force. Isaac Newton himself said, 'I suspect that my theories may all depend upon a force for which philosophers have searched all of nature in vain.' Of course, he is alluding to a higher power"[/quote:bbc93]

[url=http://www.theonion.com/news/index.php?issue=4133&n=2:bbc93]Link[/url:bbc93]

loooo!

I read that the Catholic church accepts the big bang theory, but not gravity. A tad ironic if you understand gravity.

Wait is that acually real?

can you find anything about them denying gravity? I'm not questioning your statement. I just want to read it and laugh really.

Read it in my Stephen Hawking novel. He talks about his visit to the vatican. Want a works cited happy:

Also a lot of theories and philosphies on physic were written by priests and cardinals, so they helped pave the way.

[url=http://www.theonion.com/news/index.php?issue=4133&n=2:9d8ad]Here[/url:9d8ad] is the article from The Onion. About "the sparks falling up" statement, sparks are created by a release of energy and if you observe they will turn and fall down as soon as that energy is dissipated. Jesus Christ what a bunch of nutcases.

Plus there is a cool song on this page.

that's pretty funny.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050827/ap_ ... sm_lawsuit


Assclowns... rolleyes: annoy:

Sorry Jesus

[img]http://www.nikhef.nl/pub/pr/postermateriaal/big-bang.jpg[/img]

An interesting thing to think about: There was more than just one "big bang", but many. ed:

watch Nova - Origins (4-Part Miniseries), but im sure most of you wont. It explains everything

the Torrent can be found if you look around like a spy