Battle Against Teaching Evolution in Texas Begins

Kitsune · Post by **Kitsune** » 2008-04-07 02:42pm

Well, you have to start with the old standbys of "What is a day to god" and trying to explain how dating systems interlock with each other.

He keeps wanting to go back to a Noah's flood and I keep gently trying to tell him that there is no evidence at all for a worldwide flood.

Zixinus · Post by **Zixinus** » 2008-04-07 03:01pm

He keeps wanting to go back to a Noah's flood and I keep gently trying to tell him that there is no evidence at all for a worldwide flood.

Ask him whether he would believe in a world-wide flood today.

Darth Servo · Post by **Darth Servo** » 2008-04-07 04:25pm

Kitsune wrote:You have to work with items piece by piece. What is scary is that he is a part time school teacher (luckily not science) but he believed that women have one less rib then men.

Did you show him some x-rays of the male and female rib cages.

He keeps wanting to go back to a Noah's flood and I keep gently trying to tell him that there is no evidence at all for a worldwide flood.

One of Mike's best pages:

http://www.creationtheory.org/Arguments/Hartman-6.xhtml

Oni Koneko Damien · Post by **Oni Koneko Damien** » 2008-04-07 04:35pm

Kitsune wrote:but he believed that women have one less rib then men.

Wait, what?

I'm assuming he believed this was evidence for the whole Adam and Eve, rib-creation-of-woman thing and all. But the rib was taken from Adam to create Eve in the story, so shouldn't men have one less rib than women? Gah, people can't even keep their misbeliefs consistent.

Zixinus · Post by **Zixinus** » 2008-04-07 04:40pm

Did you show him some x-rays of the male and female rib cages.

Actually, its enough that you tell that saying that gives you an instant F on a anatomy test regardless how high you scored.

My teacher once told me a story of this happening. They asked the student in, student told x connect to y bone, told the small differences in build in males and females, teacher jokingly remarked whether men have one less ribcage. Student thought for a second and remarked, that yeah, men have one less ribcage. Teacher gave an F and sent the student away.

Darth Servo · Post by **Darth Servo** » 2008-04-07 04:43pm

Zixinus wrote:Actually, its enough that you tell that saying that gives you an instant F on a anatomy test regardless how high you scored.

My teacher once told me a story of this happening. They asked the student in, student told x connect to y bone, told the small differences in build in males and females, teacher jokingly remarked whether men have one less ribcage. Student thought for a second and remarked, that yeah, men have one less ribcage. Teacher gave an F and sent the student away.

For the true hard-core fundy moron, thats just more proof of persecution.

Elmca · Post by **Elmca** » 2008-04-07 04:52pm

Kitsune wrote:but he believed that women have one less rib then men.

I actually knew a geologist who thought this (or, as Oni pointed out, the reverse, actually). He was in a Master's Degree program with me and we were discussing the ways fossil hominids were identified as male or female. After we listed the ways, I jokingly said that this job would be much easier if men really had one less rib.

He looked at me a second and then said, "You know, I KNOW they don't, but at the same time, I thought they did." He'd never put the two things together in his head.

He's not religious by any means, but it's tough to let go of those kinds of things that get into your head when you're young.

On a side note, I first heard the one-less-rib story in 6th grade Catholic school. The nun teaching us said that it was true and that if we felt our ribs and then felt a girl's we could count the difference.

I can still remembering popping a boner thinking about touching a girl's chest area. Ahh, the things nuns taught me that they'll never know...

DPDarkPrimus · Post by **DPDarkPrimus** » 2008-04-07 05:02pm

Elmca wrote: On a side note, I first heard the one-less-rib story in 6th grade Catholic school. The nun teaching us said that it was true and that if we felt our ribs and then felt a girl's we could count the difference.

It'd be easy enough to miscount ribs through flesh when you're operating under the assumption that there is one less and you are preoccupied by lustful teenage thoughts.

Ryushikaze · Post by **Ryushikaze** » 2008-04-07 10:33pm

I can't say as I ever bought into the whole One less Rib thing, even when I was a wee boy and not overly critical of the silly things being tossed at me (go go from birth indoctrination. Fortunately my father is an atheist and my mother is not particularly hard line, so I escaped the worst of it.), though that's probably because of an accurate and rather well detailed "these are your organs" basic anatomy book I found while quite young.

If you're trying to convince them, Kitsune, as it can be quite hard to chip away. I've known otherwise perfectly rational people who just sort of glitch when it comes to their religion.

Adrian Laguna · Post by **Adrian Laguna** » 2008-04-07 10:50pm

The whole rib thing is stupid even by bronze age standards. Surely people noticed that if you chop a man's arm off and he survives to reproduce his children aren't born cripples.

Andrew_Fireborn · Post by **Andrew_Fireborn** » 2008-04-07 11:13pm

Adrian Laguna wrote:The whole rib thing is stupid even by bronze age standards. Surely people noticed that if you chop a man's arm off and he survives to reproduce his children aren't born cripples.

Ah, but this is the Israeli God. A super revisionist. If he changes something, it's going to be that way till he changes it again, and thus it shall be. (Hence the whole concept of humanity as a fallen race, original sin, etc. etc.)

Zwinmar · Post by **Zwinmar** » 2008-04-08 01:49am

I was reading:

Darth Servo wrote:He keeps wanting to go back to a Noah's flood and I keep gently trying to tell him that there is no evidence at all for a worldwide flood.

One of Mike's best pages:

http://www.creationtheory.org/Arguments/Hartman-6.xhtml[/quote]

And you ommited an argument against the flat earth theory. Namely, tidal forces preclude any possibility of there being a truely flat planet.

wautd · Post by **wautd** » 2008-04-08 02:43am

Long but interesting read. YEC's truly are scum.

Shocking to see a pretty damn pro-science article coming out of Texas though.

Anguirus · Post by **Anguirus** » 2008-04-08 10:59am

^ Do you think all of Texas is wall-to-wall fundies? It's a big freaking state, and there are lots of universities there. Heck, I'm applying for a biological research internship in Texas right now.

Metatwaddle · Post by **Metatwaddle** » 2008-04-08 02:18pm

wautd wrote:Long but interesting read. YEC's truly are scum.

Shocking to see a pretty damn pro-science article coming out of Texas though.

Not all the papers are conservative. I seem to recall that the Houston Chronicle donates money to Planned Parenthood and has gotten into feuds with Bill O'Reilly.

wautd · Post by **wautd** » 2008-04-08 04:14pm

Anguirus wrote:^ Do you think all of Texas is wall-to-wall fundies?

Nope, just the majority.

Omeganian · Post by **Omeganian** » 2008-04-09 04:59am

Andrew_Fireborn wrote:
Adrian Laguna wrote:The whole rib thing is stupid even by bronze age standards. Surely people noticed that if you chop a man's arm off and he survives to reproduce his children aren't born cripples.
Ah, but this is the Israeli God. A super revisionist. If he changes something, it's going to be that way till he changes it again, and thus it shall be. (Hence the whole concept of humanity as a fallen race, original sin, etc. etc.) :P

Those concepts are Christian.

Omeganian · Post by **Omeganian** » 2008-04-09 09:52am

BTW, about the ribs part. The say Aristotle wrote in his books that a woman has less teeth than a man. The guy was married twice!

But honestly, I wonder how many people know how the part about the rib in the Tanakh is supposed to be translated.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2008-04-09 10:34am

Omeganian wrote:BTW, about the ribs part. The say Aristotle wrote in his books that a woman has less teeth than a man. The guy was married twice!

Yeah, but let's be honest: Aristotle was full of shit a LOT of the time. He belonged to the school of thought which said that pure contemplation is the only way to learn anything, and that you don't need to bother checking the results of your contemplation against observable reality.

But honestly, I wonder how many people know how the part about the rib in the Tanakh is supposed to be translated.

How is it supposed to be translated?

Omeganian · Post by **Omeganian** » 2008-04-09 10:49am

Darth Wong wrote:
But honestly, I wonder how many people know how the part about the rib in the Tanakh is supposed to be translated.
How is it supposed to be translated?

The word used is "Tsela", which can also be translated as "side". Meaning, the God took the human being, cut it in two, and it became a man and a woman. No ribs.

SilverWingedSeraph · Post by **SilverWingedSeraph** » 2008-04-09 12:29pm

Omeganian wrote:The word used is "Tsela", which can also be translated as "side". Meaning, the God took the human being, cut it in two, and it became a man and a woman. No ribs.

Really, that sounds more like God anyway. Cutting people in half sounds like the sort of thing he enjoys, based on other unsavoury parts of the Bible. Cutting people in half and then making two people is just him showing off, which he also does incessantly in the Bible.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2008-04-09 12:38pm

Darth Wong wrote:
Omeganian wrote:BTW, about the ribs part. The say Aristotle wrote in his books that a woman has less teeth than a man. The guy was married twice!
Yeah, but let's be honest: Aristotle was full of shit a LOT of the time. He belonged to the school of thought which said that pure contemplation is the only way to learn anything, and that you don't need to bother checking the results of your contemplation against observable reality.

Have to toss something in but Skepticality podcast prompts me to respond, that it might in fact have been true. After all Aristotle did not live in an edge of "Crest All Natural Whitening Toothpaste" The chances of him and his wives having all their original teeth throughout their adulthood is unlikely.

Plus as pointed out, he was often bullshitting.

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2008-04-09 02:02pm

SilverWingedSeraph wrote:
Omeganian wrote:The word used is "Tsela", which can also be translated as "side". Meaning, the God took the human being, cut it in two, and it became a man and a woman. No ribs.
Really, that sounds more like God anyway. Cutting people in half sounds like the sort of thing he enjoys, based on other unsavoury parts of the Bible. Cutting people in half and then making two people is just him showing off, which he also does incessantly in the Bible.

Alternatively you can take it as metaphore for the splitting of two persons reunited in marriage... but that is a more modern interpetation I think, because no one but the most ultra-orthodox jews think s that genesis is literal... they are much much better than christians in that respect.

Rye · Post by **Rye** » 2008-04-09 02:05pm

Omeganian wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:
But honestly, I wonder how many people know how the part about the rib in the Tanakh is supposed to be translated.
How is it supposed to be translated?
The word used is "Tsela", which can also be translated as "side". Meaning, the God took the human being, cut it in two, and it became a man and a woman. No ribs.

Could you please prove that that is how it's "supposed" to be translated, rather than rib? All the translations I've seen (from jewish and christian sources) mark it as "rib" not his whole side.

Omeganian · Post by **Omeganian** » 2008-04-09 02:28pm

Zuul wrote:
Omeganian wrote:
Darth Wong wrote: How is it supposed to be translated?
The word used is "Tsela", which can also be translated as "side". Meaning, the God took the human being, cut it in two, and it became a man and a woman. No ribs.
Could you please prove that that is how it's "supposed" to be translated, rather than rib? All the translations I've seen (from jewish and christian sources) mark it as "rib" not his whole side.

Well, most of the translations are over fifteen centuries old, a time when few people understood this. There is, however, a discussion between two sages of the Talmudic times over what is meant by "Tsela". Mind you, it wasn't about whether it was a rib - one of them claimed it was a second face (BTW, according to Wikipedia, it was a Jew who first used the word "Androgyne"), while another (a chauvinist in more than this discussion), claimed that Adam had a tail (evolutionary theory already?) which was rebuilt into a woman.