God created Arkansans to make Texans look smart.
(Though seal_clubber is apparently an exception to this.)
Guess people who are dumb enough to live in L.A. love that joke, right jab?
I’m from Texas. (I didn’t mean to offend anyone. There are obviously exceptions to that joke. The Arkansans in favor of this proposal are not exceptions.)
Guess people who are dumb enough to leave Texas love that joke, right Jab?
None taken. 
TheeGrumpy wrote:
Sounds like a typical “sovereign citizen” tax-protestor to me. Don’t tell me … he also believes that the income tax is voluntary, that the gold fringe on the American flag in a courtroom means the court only has Admiralty jurisdiction, that it makes a huge difference whether “citizen” and “state” are capitalized or not (one is the true, original, unspoiled, holy sovereign definition, and the other is the property-of-the-evil-Federal-government definition, but the sovereign citizen crowd can never agree on which is which), and that the ZIP codes and 2-letter state abbreviations used by the postal service are a trick to deprive you of your rights. Right?
Good news - apparently they haven’t the votes in the state senate to pass it into law. Still, it won’t change things - my son will still be told he will “burn in hell” because he wears a Darwin-fish shirt.
The Pleasantville chamber of commerce? In that movie, when the C. of C. has had enough of the changes being wrought, they pass a “Code of Conduct.” Among the new rules is that all the schools would teach the “non-changist” view of history, “emphasizing continuity over change.”
I watched that movie again last night. It’s one of my favorites.
They’re not legislating science - that’s impossible, because scientific truth is not determined by the Arkansas Legislature, as much as they’d apparently like to. They’re legislating education - badly.
Anybody ever been to a Hovind “lecture”? The man is absolutely scary. He’s so slick he makes Bill Clinton look like Henry Waxman (D-CA). He evidently has some kind of network, too - when he “lectured” at my university, a bus full of Baptists from the outlying rural area mysteriously showed up. The “Amens” were deafening.
from the CNN link above:
(emphasis added)
Exactly when did humans stop being animals?
Regarding my remarks about Kent Hovind’s refusal to pay taxes, tracer wrote:
…And so on. I just wanted to affirm that Hovind’s views on taxes in no way relate to his views on science or education. However, I’m sure the “Amen” crowds would be interested to know his background. As someone once said, anyone who stands in a pulpit automatically claims an unquestionable ethos that no soapbox shouter or politician could claim.
It’s time someone poked a hole in this guy, since he leaves himself so wide open. Did I mention that Hovind’s “doctorate” is in Christian education, acquired from a mail-order diploma mill? If you get the chance, read a purloined copy of his doctoral thesis published on the web. It’s a laff riot.
Since neither he nor his creationist pals can get any traction in scientific circles, they’re appealing directly to the cavemen in politics. If only the Arkansas legislators would do a little research, they’d see there really is no place for politics in this issue.
–Grump “is there a doctor of Christian education in the house?!” y
…having read the bill here on the SDMB, I felt compelled to go to the Arkansas state website and find an e-mail address for Representative Holt, such that I might ask him a couple of questions.
To summarize, the bottom line of my e-mail was what made him think that legislators knew more about science than, say, the world’s scientists? I didn’t expect a response.
I got one.
He basically asked if I had read the bill, and that if I did, I might find it wasn’t exactly what was being reported - he was even kind enough to paste the text of it into his message!
So, thinking we all might have overlooked some crucial tidbit in the bill that would suddenly make the legislative world a sunny happy place once again, I read the bill in his e-mail.
Nope, same bill.
So this morning I composed a lengthy reply to pretty much everything in the bill, courtesy of the search engine Google, the Talk Origins Archive, and the letter “K.”
Let’s see if he responds.
superhead…
Uh, I meant to do that. I’m just too lazy.
Actually, I’m screwing around with my own legislature. Let’s hope your message sinks in with Holt (it won’t).
Despite the fact that this bill is designed to cast doubt of evolution in the minds of students, so they’ll more likely retain their “default” belief in Adam and Eve, I see nothing wrong with maintining that evolution is “only a theory”. So long, that is, if they:
1 - Provide an accurate definition of what a theory is according to science.
2 - Place just as much emphasis on what is "just a theory" in other ares of science.
3 - Acknowledge that creationism isn't even a theory.
That said, what I want to know is, were any astronomers, geologists, paleontologists, biologists, etc. able to respond to any of the assertions contained in this bill which concern their respective scientific discipline? Shirley, legislation which relies on specific facts would not as far as this one has without checking with the neccessary experts to ensure they are really facts. (Ha, that’s a good one! – slaps thigh)
I would like to hear some scientific responses to some of the bill’s assertions. Anybody? I can respond to one off the to of my head:
[quote]
…(J)(i) Neanderthal Man;
(ii) At the International Congress of Zoology (1958) Dr. A. J. E. Cave said his examination showed that the famous Neanderthal skeleton found in France over 50 years ago is that of an old man who suffered from arthritis.
[quote]
I can’t believe the C’s are still using this; it’s the classic example of a half-truth. Sure, the original neanderthal skeleton turned out to have arthritis and physical anthropologists were forced to alter their original conception of neanderthal, but it was still a neanderthal with arthritis. What other pieces of evidence do physical anthropologists have on human origins? More than just the one skeleton, eh?
The creationsist authors of this bill are using what I’d like to call the “bloody glove” variant of the “big lie” tactic. That is, attack the most well-known pieces of evidence (in this case archeopterix, Lucy, neanderthals, etc.) and cast doubt on them. This won’t impress the experts or anyone familiar with all or most of the evidence, but the ignorant masses–including Arkansas legislators (or the Simpson jury)–who only see the iceberg tips can be easily swayed.
I’m glad to see something like this is happening in my home state.
Pitiful.
Although it appears it’s not happening any more.
Evolution proposal shot down in House
Also Arkansas House Bill 2548 is a composite of anti-evolutionary sources
Thank Darwin. 
Still, it’s sad to see that more Arkansas representatives voted for this nutty bill than against it. Three cheers for those fence-sitters who didn’t want to go on record as a “NO” vote.
Fraudulent like, say, everything dealing with evolution. What a dimwit.
CollegeStudent wrote:
And I’m glad to see that ignoramuses like this are 2,000 miles away from my state.
Wanna bet? Here in the piney woods of Deep East Texas, I feel your pain.
We have entire towns here that refuse to acknowledge Daylight Savings Time…
-David
JonF wrote:
Unfortunately, while that article talks at great lengths about the bill and the reasons it was voted down, nowhere does it mention that most of the discoveries listed in the bill as “false or fraudulent” are in fact nothing of the sort. (Although it does quote legislators who voted for the bill as saying that they were “just trying to get these false and fraudulent theories out of our classrooms.”)
Update, still no reply from Rep. Holt - my last e-mail took a similar line of attack as one of the links previously posted - a brief description of what was wrong, and then a link to some “good info” on the subject. I imagine I probably won’t be hearing from Rep. Holt again - I additionally took the time to ask (accuse?) him if Hovind or Gish were involved in this little stunt - think I’ll get a reply?