Believe everything in the bible should be discounted?
I have not read the whole Bible, also i was not there. I also don't believe in God. But the bible still has value to me, its stories have meaning from the morals it implies to others. People forget them.
I also think that, even if I don't believe in God, that doesn't give me the right to force my beliefs on to others.
I think you're missing a big part of why this is making people angry. The professor is teaching a biology class at a college level, to students who are paying a large amount of money for the privilege of hearing him lecture. There's a certain amount of expectation that goes along with that - the professor's personal beliefs are all well and good but do not belong in a science curriculum, full stop.
It's a community college, so I suppose you can't expect them to be completely exacting in their hiring practices, but if I were you I would go have a talk with the department head. This is a collegiate-level biology course; you have to have certain standards for what is being taught. If they don't want to take it seriously, perhaps they should start making inquiries into hiring an astrology professor to round out their pseudoscience department.
Remember that if you shoot medium format film and want to be in control of the development processes, b&w might be only way to go.
To be fair, with a Hasselblad medium format digital back you've got a pretty massive amount of control over every step of the development process. I shoot and process RAW through Bridge --> Photoshop, and while it's a bit "artless" compared to developing and printing in a proper darkroom, I appreciate being able to tweak every last minuscule detail without compromising the original negative in any way. I do miss watching prints magically develop in a tray full of chemicals, though, that kind of feeling can't ever be replaced by scanners and hard drives and Wacom tablets.
EDIT: Whoops! Didn't realize you were strictly talking about film. Yeah, black and white is definitely the way to go if you want more control when developing film.
I went through about three pairs of Sennheiser HD-201's throughout college - they were relatively cheap and still provided great sound, although the cheap plastic construction was a huge downside. I've since upgraded to a pair of Sony MDR-somethingorothers, which have that neat little noise-canceling switch for airplanes. They sound a hell of a lot better than anything else I've owned, but since I've started collecting music on vinyl and my apartment isn't the best for loud music, I need to invest in a really nice pair of cans.
I'm just not so sure about photography as an art form. You can tell me a teenager took those photos with Instagram and I'd still believe you. To know that she used some old camera to take those pictures really mean nothing to an outsider like me. I think photography is the only creative "art" I don't respect that much.
When some teenager with Instagram creates a cohesive body of work that documents something like Chicago street life with the kind of emotional quality that Vivien Maier or any other actual photographer can produce, get back to me. I can understand why someone might brush off photography because you "just point and shoot, right?" I used to have the same reaction before I tried to pick up a camera and do the same thing. Both film and digital photography require a huge amount of developed skill and dedication to be able to produce something of passable technical quality, let alone create work that makes any kind of statement or observation about the world. The magic of photography is in capturing the "decisive moment," where all the elements of space and time align themselves perfectly and you are able to capture it. I've been taking pictures for years, made thousands upon thousands of exposures, and I can really only point to two or three of my pictures that I would call "good" in any sense.
I don't mean to come off like an asshole, but I really wish people wouldn't brush off photography as a whole because some stupid fucking kids are taking pictures of their lunch with a Holga filter.
Vivien Maier's body of work is amazing, not only for the fact that it went undiscovered for so long, but because it's just incredible street photography. It stands up with Winogrand and Cartier-Bresson's work, as far as I'm concerned. It's almost more impressive that most of them were shot with a Rolleiflex - it's a lot harder to get candid shots when you've got a huge medium format camera on you, which is why most street photographers used discrete 35mm cameras, like Leicas.
Maier also makes me feel like a total idiot for sharing every stupid little piece of art I make on Facebook or Flickr or Twitter or whatever. I made a dumb little painting last night and put it on the internet, for what? Some small feeling of validation and a handful of "likes"?
I hate black and white pictures. Sure they look artsy but i could take a black and white picture of my morning shit and it'd look artsy in black and white. Just saying is all....
"Books are stupid, I hate them! Sure, people love reading them, but they're just a bunch of words on a page. I can put a bunch of words on a page too, check this shit out! Rubber. Canada. Trench. Vending machine. Barcode. See!? I'm a great author now!"