HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » HughBeaumont » Journal
Page: 1

HughBeaumont

Profile Information

Member since: Fri Aug 13, 2004, 02:12 PM
Number of posts: 24,461

About Me

If anyone's wondering why I haven't been here much lately, it's because I feel no one is learning anything from 2016. Neoliberalism is a thing and it doesn't win elections in the 21st Century. People want a candidate that's going to take strong, non-waffling stands on human rights the rest of the world enjoys. Enough living in the goddamned Reagan 1980s. Enough taking solar panels off the roof. Enough introducing more rightwingedness into American economics. Enough medical bankruptcies. Enough governing by mythology. Enough science denial. Enough of spitting on women, children, veterans and the LGBTQI community. Enough kicking the can. ENOUGH. America needs to move past it's "everything has to be about making a buck" bullshit. I'd prefer a candidate not born during the FDR/Truman administrations. No offense, but you had your time . . . and you got us Trump. Plus, I can't take another one of these still-Capitalist Boomer codgers yap on about "bootstraps" when college now costs a mortgage, necessity costs have been outpacing wage growth for 20 years and automation promises to kill more jobs than it creates. I don't want to hear what is or isn't "politically achievable". Kick-the-Can economics was never asked "How is it going to be paid for?". Tax Cuts for the rich were never given a spending limit. Folly wars were never asked "Why is this necessary?". Corporate Pork by the billions was and is always approved. America's safety net needs to be greatly expanded and retirement age needs to be drastically lowered. This country throws out far too many people that still have a decade or two of prime contribution left. If life doesn't get fairer for you or I pretty goddamned quickly, we aren't going to have much of one.

Journal Archives

PD: Including creationism in public school curriculum part of well-rounded education.

The joke is I'm not kidding. The Plain Dealer actually published this on their website, from a "guest columnist" with Baptist University credentials.

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2015/01/post_276.html#incart_opinion

Further, naturalism and evolutionary theory are the reigning paradigms within the scientific community. Even so, there is still a role for an explanation and exploration of the minority report. Indeed, proponents of both intelligent design and creationism argue that their understanding of science and the relevant data is coherent and corresponds to reality. If a theory has the most explanatory power and best accounts for the evidence on offer, then at the very least alternative and opposing viewpoints and perspectives should be considered on their own terms.

So, for example, including the spectrum of opinion on the origins and significance of irreducibly complex organisms would only enhance a student's understanding of the world. Even if the prevailing paradigm is naturalism, these phenomena should still be investigated.

This kind of interdisciplinary dialogue is not only appropriate but necessary to equip students to think carefully and critically about the knowledge they are receiving. Just as a curriculum that excluded an explanation of naturalism and evolutionary theory would be inappropriate for public schools, so too, one devoid of the options of intelligent design or creationism.

The world around us teems with life, breath-taking mystery, and terrifying intrigue. Why is there something rather than nothing? Why do the natural processes that we can observe and study continue to function in the way that they do? What keeps the cosmos intact and the biosphere contained?


Simply stunning.

Creationism: It takes not so much a leap of faith, but rather a giant tumble down Mount Dumbass.
Go to Page: 1