I Am Bored

Loads of viral videos, games, memes, lists and social networking for when you're bored. Updated every day, so visit often.
LatestPopularMost BookmarkedMost EmailedTop RatedMy FavoritesRandomChat
AllGamesFunnyEntertainmentQuizzesWeirdTechLifestyle, Arts & Lit.News & PoliticsScienceSportsMisc
Submit Content  





rss

friendsmore friends | add your site
Extreme Humor

Funny Games

Funny Stuff

FreeGame Heaven

Asylum

Oddee

Viva La Games

Gorilla Mask

Pugorama

123 Games

Angelsfire.nl

Crazy Games

Not Healthy

Pandasmash

Free Samples

Caykeyfi Games

Hecklerspray

Comic World

eBaum Nation

Comics Alliance

I hate retail



Back to Listing

Teacher Sued For Criticizing Creationism

Hits: 23365 | Rating: (2.5) | Category: News & Politics | Added by: Pooptart19
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next >   Jump to: Bottom    Last Post
ICantNameMe
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
 34 Posts
Wednesday, March 23, 2011 1:37:25 AM
... I'm pretty sure it's illegal to record a class without prior consent from the teacher and or principal...

Religion has a VERY big impact on human behavior, which influenced history. Yes, the teacher was inserting his own opinion, but it was used quite well in older times as leverage to control people.

Also the teacher seems a lot more correct to me -.-

Possible Resolutions:
1. Teacher does not rant at all
2. Teacher gives a disclaimer before he starts his rant.
3. Student complains about how the teacher is bashing his religion.

BootneckBaz
Male, 30-39, Europe
 17 Posts
Tuesday, January 25, 2011 2:25:58 PM
Burn that student! He is a witch!!!!! Buuuurrrrrrn him!

mischeif954
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 484 Posts
Thursday, December 09, 2010 7:24:22 PM
Fair enough, it's a study still in progress. That sounds far more reasonable then every person sex being established before they are even conceive we'll see.

NottaSpy
Male, 40-49, Western US
 874 Posts
Thursday, December 09, 2010 4:38:43 PM
I don't know what that is or where it comes from. Had this still been a page one topic I'd Google it to find out, but this is now page 4 and I'm moving on.

The fruit fly study I was talk about was the cover story of the science journal Cell. The title was Genetic and Neural Control of Drosophila Sexual Behavior. The fruit fly study isn't too useful since it is fruit flies and not humans, but it does show a pattern of evidence that is quickly becoming undeniable. There are environmental factors after birth that affect orientation, but there is also evidence that some have their orientation set before birth.

In Nature there are no hard an fast rules. I'd be willing to bet that some people do choose to be gay, but the evidence is mounting that the majority of people do not choose their orientation. There is good evidence that that orientation is set in utero.

mischeif954
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 484 Posts
Thursday, December 09, 2010 3:03:55 PM
@ Notta Spy

1) Without a wink or a chuckle, Odenwald claims that these male fruit flies are gay -- and that he and Zhang made them that way. The scientists say they transplanted a single gene into the flies that caused them to display homosexual behavior. And that's very interesting, they assert, because a related gene exists in human beings, although there is no evidence yet that the human gene has an effect on sexual preference.

2)
The research demonstrates a likely link between brain function and sexual orientation, Savic suggests. But she told New Scientist that the study "does not answer the cause-and-effect question"

So the brain-activation of gay men by AND may contribute to sexual orientation of those men, or simply be the result of their orientation and sexual behaviour.

Those the studies you were referring to? You left those parts out, but interesting none the less.

I-IS-BORED
Male, 18-29, Canada
 2432 Posts
Thursday, December 09, 2010 12:42:41 PM
@nottaspy
To mischief those all have the same credibility as somebody claiming the bible foretells the future. When you talk about studies that follow the scientific method, use proper statistical analysis, and are published in professional journals what he thinks you're referring to is studies that use a methodology comparable to that used to prove the bible foretells the future. Basically he takes your documented experiments that can be repeated and will yield results within the established control limits every time and says they're just meaningless claims.

NottaSpy
Male, 40-49, Western US
 874 Posts
Thursday, December 09, 2010 10:16:53 AM
They have found a gene in female fruit flies that when flipped makes them gay.

They have found that the sexual center of a gay man's brain are activated by the smell of the male pheromone.

Studies have shown links to hormone level in utero, and biological advantage through related female fertility, and links to birth order affecting the rate of gay birth.

Seriously, for you to make that claim that there is no evidence clearly shows an ignorance on the subject. Which begs the question, why did you decide to come here and spout your bullpoo when you clearly have no idea?

NottaSpy
Male, 40-49, Western US
 874 Posts
Thursday, December 09, 2010 10:05:03 AM
@mischeif954, you are wrong. There are studies that show that you can be born gay.

They did a study with twins. With identical twins, if one was gay, then there was a 52% chance the other was gay. But with fraternal twins, the rate is only 26%. The difference between identical and fraternal rates shows there is a strong link to either genetic or hormonal influence that produces a gay baby at birth. The study did also show that there was environmental elements, but mainly it shows that there are babies that are born gay, no choice.

There are also brain scans that show the a gay males brain is wired like a straight female and a gay female is wired like a straight male. I do not see how someone chooses to rewire their brain. It is a good argument against gay being a choice.

There are also startle response test that show that people acquire their sexual orientation very early in life, maybe even before they are born.

mischeif954
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 484 Posts
Thursday, December 09, 2010 9:11:46 AM
I don't think that NottaSpy what I'm saying is that if anyone of these studies published and released none of them have shown time and time again that a person is born gay and what factor is it that exactly determines it. It's not a known fact that people are born gay it's a popular opinion.

Lol @ Davymid lol nothing more to add then grammar nazi comment.

@ I-Is-Bored once again you are reading my post and "observing" my point. I don't believe you can predict with a code in the bible or any other code in a book. I was showing an example of how if you know a wanted and outcome its not "random chance" you can to a point manipulate what your studying to get the desired result.

So back to NottaSpy since he's the only talking about the same thing and has sense to use "context clues" and notice I didn't say "scientific methods" when I said methods I was referring to the methods in the studies he was referring to.

NottaSpy
Male, 40-49, Western US
 874 Posts
Thursday, December 09, 2010 8:27:44 AM
@mischeif954, the math part comes in the form of statistical analysis. It is also where they get the margin of error at the bottom of poll results. If a study shows a statistical significant result, that means that it is a real affect or someone screwed with the base data. When someone publishes, that is when other scientists get a chance to make sure everything is above board. If they find something questionable, they can try to repeat the study to see if they get the same result. With careers and reputations on the line, you rarely see people willing to screw with the results.

What you are saying is that they can pick an algorithm that suits their purpose to make it look like they have a result. That type of crap wouldn't even get past the committee that determines what gets published. When they submit their finding, they also submit their data.

mischeif954 must think scientists are a bunch of monkeys playing football in the dark.

I-IS-BORED
Male, 18-29, Canada
 2432 Posts
Thursday, December 09, 2010 5:21:34 AM
Wow mischief... You do realize his post was about the significant number of published and repeated tests with results that don't vary? And THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD refers to A SINGLE method. See how it has a 'the' in front?

And if you really believe the bible contains encoded future events you should also realize that ANY sufficiently large text can be used to do the same.

Moby Dick contains lots of 'predictions' and all of them happened after it was published. That doesn't make them any more than pure random chance.

davymid
Male, 30-39, Europe
 12088 Posts
Wednesday, December 08, 2010 10:36:10 PM
Holy Jesus mischeif954, learn 2 punctuate. That last one literally hurt to read.

mischeif954
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 484 Posts
Wednesday, December 08, 2010 10:11:18 PM
@ I is bored

NO, he said there some methods backed by math I was pointing out the fact just because math was used in a method doesn't mean it a correct theory the bible thing I was referring to is that if you picked select verses correlated them with numbers that there is a code to predict events.

I didn't not call which ever method he was referring to as wrong because he didn't even refer to a method he just said there's methods out there...

What I mean by substantial evidence and your definition are completely different a good scientific theory involves a theory that is tested and if tested again under the same conditions in a different test group produce the same or similar results the theories thus far for the notion of being born gay thus far are inconsistent and have varying results, but I've strayed from the threads topic long enough. We're not even talking about the same thing anymore sooooo l8r.

IndigoIndigo
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
 30 Posts
Wednesday, December 08, 2010 7:32:55 PM
Sounds like a typical college professor. What I can tell from this, including the obvious gap in knowledge of the details on this lawsuit, the court just set a precedent. You can now sue your teacher/professor for being annoying.

I-IS-BORED
Male, 18-29, Canada
 2432 Posts
Wednesday, December 08, 2010 5:44:46 PM
@mischief
so when nottaspy says scientific method you hear 'bat poo crazy method'? where did you get the idea that he believes "people say you can find mathematical codes in the bible to fore tell events" is true? you seem to be padding your responses with unrelated statements

mischeif954
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 484 Posts
Wednesday, December 08, 2010 3:32:33 PM
@ Nottaspy I can look around and yes I know the scientific method and math methods also, also know that people have came up with algorithms using math before you can pick numbers anywhere and say they mean something people say you can find mathematical codes in the bible to fore tell events I'm very open minded the problem is no one comes with intelligent article or even a logical argument.

i.e.: I've always liked boobies seriously? We all did we fed from them.

And every time you point to the fallacy in the argument of preordained behavior people deflect or digress.

Close minded is saying even if people who are in fact gay or bisexual told you why and or how they became who they are today you still would say its not a choice. Theres people who were one way and live another way now.

I-IS-BORED
Male, 18-29, Canada
 2432 Posts
Wednesday, December 08, 2010 3:13:21 PM
@mischeif
dunno bout you, but i liked boobies long before i thought about having sex

NottaSpy
Male, 40-49, Western US
 874 Posts
Wednesday, December 08, 2010 8:30:31 AM
@mischeif954, you want me to show you irrefutable proof? on the internet? LOL, I've been in too many link fights to know better. There are too many think tanks out there manufacturing evidence, falsifying facts, and breeding doubt for me to do that again.

The real test is if you have an open mind or if you have already decided that being gay is a choice. If you really are interested in the science, then I urge you to do your own research. Google it; find and read the studies. They haven't figured out how to fake publishing studies without being called out by the rest of the scientific community.

You'll see that I am not talking about theories in the colloquial sense. I am talking about real published studies that rely on real math. Yes it is a complicated subject, that is why science uses controls and looks for statistical significance.

I was not talking out my ass and I'll assume, based on your post, that you just don't understand the scientific method.

klobuerste
Male, 18-29, Europe
 7 Posts
Wednesday, December 08, 2010 7:04:05 AM
I like that professor

mischeif954
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 484 Posts
Wednesday, December 08, 2010 5:37:44 AM
Hmmm didn't think it was hard to understand but ok what the sentence meant is according to you at developmental stages of 0-2, 3-4, 5-6, 7-10, 10- puberty before you could even have "sex" or have an urge to have sex. The ages of infancy up until puberty you already knew what sex you were attracted? You seemed to observe my point, but still can't seem to understand it in a sense yes you there was a point where you had no sexual orientation because you had no sexual attraction. Is there a check box for sexual orientation for a 3 mo olds patient form? Do you suggest that the moment you do find a sexual orientation it was preordained by your genes and not through environmental factors? If you can so eagerly agree by that logic, why is then if I were to ask could a person were to be born on some other spectrum like good or evil, perky or emo, aggressor or pacifist you would immediately dismiss it?

I-IS-BORED
Male, 18-29, Canada
 2432 Posts
Tuesday, December 07, 2010 10:32:38 PM
@mischief
Do you understand what calling a subject 'black and white' means? Saying I'm calling sexuality a black and white subject means I'm saying bisexuality doesn't exist, which is something I NEVER did.

No idea what your sentence is trying to say. Obviously if you aren't bisexual then you are heterosexual, homosexual, or asexual. The only other alternative being attracted to sexless inanimate objects/substances or plants, but even those people typically assign a sex. You are also obviously just ignorant to your sexuality if you are attracted to a sex but are unable to recognize it yourself. No clue what you're getting at.

mischeif954
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 484 Posts
Tuesday, December 07, 2010 9:49:05 PM
"now stop using food because saying you LIKE lots of foods and you happen to pick one today is only equivalent to being bisexual and tonight you happen to pick a partner of a particular sex."

My understanding from this is unless your bisexual, you are gay or straight there was no time before that you just were ignorant to sexual behavior and developed your own behavior according to your environmental factors.

I-IS-BORED
Male, 18-29, Canada
 2432 Posts
Tuesday, December 07, 2010 9:26:42 PM
nobody ever said sexuality was black and white

mischeif954
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 484 Posts
Tuesday, December 07, 2010 8:58:33 PM
Logical statement towards saying people are born gay.
That's the thing though your trying to limit my scope to things that are black and white but is gay black and white? You can like manly looking women or feminine men sexual attraction is not black and white, there's transsexuals, there butches there's givers there's takers when did you decide you preferred being the dominant one maybe you switch it up these are all behaviors that are developed through experiment like homosexuality.

I-IS-BORED
Male, 18-29, Canada
 2432 Posts
Tuesday, December 07, 2010 8:34:33 PM
@mischief
I'll make the logical statements really easy for you

All Human females are Humans.
This does not imply all Humans are Human females.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next > 

You Must be Signed in to Add a Comment

If you've already got an I-Am-Bored.com account,
click here to sign in.

If you don't have an account yet,
Click Here to Create a Free Account
 

Back to Listing ^top


Bored | Suggest a Link | Advertise | Contact I Am Bored | About I Am Bored | Link to I Am Bored | Live Submission | Privacy | TOS | Ad Choices | Copyright Policy |
© 2014 Demand Media, Inc. All rights reserved.