HaltIamReptar

Darwinism is theoretical. Granted, most people find the evidence substantial and worthy of belief, but far too many people were too stupid to recognize the shift from the scientific community's willingness to admit the mutability of it to the current stance of immutable faith in it.

I believe in Creationism. I've studied the evidence myself. Most people believe in Darwinism, including people who share my faith. That's fine; we both think each other gullible. I've been called "stupid," "backward," "retarded," and a few other choice words because of it, and had the figurative door slammed on my face. But I believe in open discourse. I'm all for teaching Darwinism, because I don't believe it stands up to scrutiny. I also think Shrinking Violent Creationists are pathetic. Belief should never shrink before examination, no matter the the belief or the holder, because beliefs should stand or fall on their own. I've bought and read God is Not Great,The God Delusion, and many other books of that sort for just that reason.

I think your teacher should teach both theories, spending much, much more time on what is generally considered Darwinism than on Creationism. You're paying to go to college, not seminary. But you're also paying to learn facts, not what to believe. The list of organisms found in the Permian strata is fact, as are the theories of why those organisms are found there. The moment anyone tells you what to do with the evidence presented, be very suspicious.

I can't wait to see the responses to this, but don't be too surprised if I don't post back. I encourage open discourse, but if I don't respond there's a good chance I don't think you capable of it. Heaven knows I've seen more than my fair share of straw effigies in my image.

@believer258: I actually like the teacher and he likes me (or it seems like he does). I don't hate the dude. I'm just disappointed. He walked a very fine line in how he worded almost everything (Although him saying "There is equal evidence between creationism and evolution" was basically word-for-word what he said. How he can get around that statement is by saying that there is equally no real evidence for macroevolution and creationism/intelligent design, they are just 'theories.') That wouldn't fly in most academic circles, but here it would. I don't think I could get him fired even if I wanted to. This thread was more about me venting and hearing other's takes on such things. After I get my grade I'm probably going to plop a pile of research on his desk that debunks everything he said and then take Bio II from someone else. lol

How do you "confirm" someone is a gang member?

Your story reeks of bullshit bro. You sound like you are simply trying to bring down Hispanics. Here are a few parts of your story that make it obvious:

Your going to try and tell me that you and a group of Hispanics committed a hate crime against a white girl and you guys faced no punishment? If you physically fucked up her face, parents and teachers would immediately take notice. And if they didn't then (yea right) they would take notice that something was wrong when she started to ditch and fail classes after being a straight A student. Not only would you get punished to the fullest extent of the law possible (and then some) for being a minority and committing a crime against a white female, you would also get fucked for messing up one of the best students at the school. Also there were no witnesses while this assault was happening? Bull. You would also be charged with arson for burning the paper and verbal assault for all the shit you said. And you were taking Psychology and AP Chem and yet you were stupid enough to scum to peer pressure. There are a shit ton more holes but I will stop there.

In fact, it seems like you are just made a more violent version of the intro to Grease. At least be original next time bro.

"what evidence would that be?" would be their own metrics that generated that graph linked in the topic.