Congrats Oklahoma for Ruining Your Schools

Oklahoma Passes Anti-evolution legislation

I don't understand how Creationism passes off as "science." And I don't understand why the right thinks that it should be taught in a science class. In a religious studies class? Sure. Not in a science class.

But the idea of Creationism lacks every part of a scientific theory. Please note that the words "theory" and "evidence" have scientific meanings that can be different than colloquial meanings. A theory is far more than an idea; a theory is a principle or a group of principles used to explain a phenomenon and is developed through empirical evidence. A theory must be testable or it is not a good theory.

Evidence is any observable support for a theory that is experienced through any empirical senses, limited to eyes, ears, nose, tongue and touch. Faith is not scientific evidence. Belief is not scientific evidence. The Bible is not scientific evidence.

With all of this said, then it is the challenge of Creationists to, using the scientific method, create a theory.

Now lets do this for them:

1. The world was created 6000 years ago. Wait, problem: There are fossils that are beyond 100 million years old. Geological records show that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old and the Red Shift shows the universe to be 13.7 billion years old since the point of singularity. Well, there goes that hypothesis. Oh wait, you tell me god made the world to look old? In the face of overwhelming evidence, provide me with evidence, as defined above, that the world was created by this trickster god who wants to confuse us all.

2. There is an intelligent designer. Hmm, I don't see a name tag or a copyright restriction anywhere. So ah, where is this designer? More importantly, where is the evidence that he exists? Some people argue that the odds of it "just happening" are far too great for it to happen, that the universe is too young for that.

Let me use a House episode to explain something. One doctor wanted to run some tests to find out what disease this kid had. The problem was there were so many tests that the odds so high that it would have taken months to get the right result, and so Dr. House objects. But another doctor points out that it would only take a full month if all but the last test was false. Perhaps the first test will be the right one? Or the second?

Thus time isn't a good argument here, even with great odds. Because even though the odds suck, they'll be as bad on the first attempt as they are on the last attempt and thus it could just as easily occur first as it could in the middle or at the end.

Another point, there are billions of billions of stars in this universe and god-knows how many planets revolve around them. Until recently, our 9 planets were the only known planets, but extra-solar planets have been found around other stars. Given that, there are probably billions of billions of planets, increasing the odds of a life-giving planet quite dramatically.

Using the odds is another weak argument.

3. The world was created in 7 days. Then explain the dinosaurs. According to this model, there was but a few days between dinosaurs and homo sapiens. Homo sapiens did not appear for thousands of thousands of years after the dinosaurs. And it was certainly more than a week from the creation of light to the creation of man.

So my friends on the Christian Right, why are you trying to place this "theory" in a science class when it doesn't fit the definition of a scientific theory?

I was taught, in a religion class of all places, that Genesis was a metaphor, not a story to be taken literally. Metaphors do not belong in science classes. Only theory.

In other news, President Elect Barack Obama is not yet the president. Why are we asking for his judgement on things like Hamas and Senator Burris? Shouldn't we still be going to Bush about these things? People say the man is being silent but it seems to me that he said something a while back about there being one president at a time. Certainly, he should be considering these issues so he's ready for them on the 20th, but until then, he doesn't have any authority to do anything.

I find it amazing that protesters in the middle east have railed against Obama for doing nothing about Israel. Well golly, could be because maybe, he isn't president for another two weeks?

And I'm beginning to love the Republican attitudes. Obama hasn't even been president yet and they're already saying he's gonna be a terrible president. Why do you have to be a sore loser? Face it. Obama won. You lost. Now it would be in the best interest for you and the nation if you'd stop complaining about him, swallow your pride and hope for the best. Its what I'd've done had McCain won. (And I'd've sent him a box of heart medication to keep Palin from being president. Extra Strength Bayer). You're wasting energy, republicans, by complaining about Obama. Who knows, he might be the next FDR. He also might be Karl Marx. Only time will tell. And lets give the man at least a year after inauguration before judging him. Change, whether you believe him or not, won't be instantaneous.

And one last thing, on Hamas: I'm not a fervant supporter of Israel, I have to wonder if they truly are going at every length to avoid civilian casualties. But I am sick of all this support for the terrorist group Hamas. Hamas is deliberately placing their rockets and mortars in civilian areas to make sure that Israel produces a Palestinian body count so that Hamas can get the international support that it enjoys. All these "bias free" news programs are painting Israel as the bad guys. Hamas is purposefully firing rocket at Israel and then crying when Israel bites back.

I don't know enough about the history here to say that Israel is innocent and I doubt it but come on, give us both sides equally.

My personal opinion on the middle east is this: Find an alternative energy pronto. Use this energy to replace oil completely. Then remove all troops from every region in the Middle East, including Israel. Let them fight and may the best man win that godforsaken strip of dirt between Egypt and Turkey. Let the best man win whats left of Mesopotamia. And who cares who owns the Arabian Penninsula? Its just sand and more sand.

Why should the US involve itself. It solves a few problems. 1. No more terrorists. If we're gone, why would they hate us and attack us any more? 2. No more troops dying thousands of miles from home for a questionable cause. 3. No more dependence from nations that are potentially hostile. 4. No Americans dying in someone else's war. 5. Islamic nutjobs will no longer be a threat to the US and we can then focus our attention on Christian nutjobs in the homeland, such as Fred Phelps and the Oklahoma School Board . . .

"Madness is like gravity, all it takes is a little push" The Joker, The Dark Knight

J Kuhl Signing Off