Kate asked, when reading that I suggested that both sides of the global warning issue should be presented, whether I thought that intelligent design should be presented in a course on evolution. My first response was "no," that is different.
But then I remembered a lecture I heard by a mathematician about why we shouldn't teach intelligent design in the schools. He proceeded to teach a lot of very interesting science in disproving intelligent design. As I listened to him, I started to visualize students coming to school with backward thoughts and how important it is to their education that the errors in their thinking be discussed.
I'm now visiting my in-laws and had the global climate change discussion with my father-in-law. Like 53% of the tea party, he believed that man probably didn't cause climate change, and that soon it was just as likely that it would cool down as it would start to warm up.
I did feel like taking the other side but quickly realized that I would not be able to convince him that, as my global warning teacher says, we are on a train, doing our "own thing" and that the train is about a mile from the edge of a cliff... and soon we would all die.
I wished then that I could show him charts and graphs proving our demise. What better deed would there be than to save the Earth?
Do we all think that what we believe is fact?
To Kim Mosley ’s “Meteor” on the Eve of the Election Ooh, coming right at us the slam! It hurls us upside down and sideways splas...
Pulse The pulsing sounds of color reverberate in kaleidoscopic bits that scatter in pieces of beat, strands of band, shards of bard,...
I was going to write something about the difference between grieving and compassion. If we are all suffering, as Buddha surmised, then w...