GaHillBilly

Gern. . . "I have a very difficult time engaging in any scientific discussion with those who hold the belief that the earth was created in 6 days and is only 5-10 thousand years old. Just sayin'." I have lived all my life in the evangelical community, and except for my mother, I've never personally known anyone who believed that. I know some must, but I haven't encountered them personally. Who do you do know who believes that? Or, are you just throwing that out in hopes it hits someone? packsaddle . . . "GHB, anyone who does not want to engage in actual science should no

Sorry, the terms aren't clear. I should have said it better, but unfortunately, it's not a debate that has led to clarity of terminology. Anyhow, what's currently required in most graduate biology departments is an a priori presumption of a closed natural universe. In other words even if you find, embedded in the DNA code the words in Hebrew, "I am Yahweh", you MUST assert -- even in the absence of all evidence -- that the explanation for that is random and explainable in terms of natural (ie, non-supernatural) causes. It used to be acceptable to embrace natural causes only as a wo

"Human's are now a virus on this planet, and a massive die off of these invasive parasites would see huge global benefits for other species, and eco systems." So, does the solution start at home, for you? Or, do you subscribe to the currently popular ideology, "eco-hypocrisy"? GaHillBilly

"Scientists don't talk like politicians, eh?" Wish it were so. The university system has changed enough, so that there are almost no niches left for the apolitical 'just let me do my science' guys. I've had to look at this very closely over the last 12 months, because my older son is about to graduate summa in biology, and is being pushed hard to go get a PhD at UGA. The problem, which his teachers don't know about, that he's not a true believer in naturalistic evolution. He's not combative, like I am, so they haven't clued into what's going on when he occasionally drops his l

"On the flip side, one of the co-leaders in my daughters GS troop is "out" and has daughter in the troop. This is one of things I think GSUSA got right." Maybe in your area. I don't know why I hadn't thought to bring this up before. Maybe it's because so many years have passed. But, for a number of years, long before I had any involvement with Scouting, I provided services over a period of years to a nearby Girl Scout Camp. The services put me on site, but behind the scenes in sort of an not-quite-out-of-site, but definitely out of mind way. I never had any professional pro

It's easy to forget that, at the base of the AGW debate, there is a real scientific question. The politics are so loud, so driven by values that have nothing to do with AGW, and so compromised by scientists who've been caught up in the politics, that it's hard to see the scientific question. But there still is one, with 4 possible answers: 1. Given the data and tech we currently have, we can't tell whether GW is or is not occurring. 2. GW is happening, but won't affect humans much. 3. GW is happening and will affect humans a lot, but it is not anthropogenic in origin. 4. GW

Y'all need to distinguish allowing girls in, and allowing gays in. Most homeschoolers are rather conservative. Allowing gays in would push those who are in, out, and eliminate BSA from consideration by those not now participating. Allowing girls in -- if managed properly, w/ separate patrols etc. -- would result in a BIG increase in interest by home schoolers. The #1 objection I've encountered, as I've shopped Scouting to home schoolers, is "Yes, but what about my daughters?". It's probably an odd thing, but going coed in Scouting would attract, not repel, large numbers of

Eagle92 wrote: "We had a youth on summer camp staff that was gay and was sent home b/c he propositioned several members of the staff." -- Not imagination. I wrote that my uncle had tried to seduce me when I was young Scout age. -- Also, not imagination, and a good example of why YPF is needed. I also wrote that I had repeated problems with being accosted in bathrooms in Europe, when I was 18, by guys who were much older. -- Also, not imagination, and reasons for disbelieving the constant, "Oh, they'd never do that." Yes, some of them will. I'll bet that t

"Do the LDS and Catholics welcome gays into their church? Or are outed gays excommunicated? Couldn't they apply the same standards to their youth programs?" Depends on what you mean. I know that in the RC church, and I'm pretty sure in the LDS church, being a CELIBATE gay is fine. The standard is sex within heterosexual marriage, only. If you aren't having sex, you're fine. If you are having sex outside of hetero marriage, whether you are a single hetero or homosexual, it is a matter of discipline. Of course, as in Scouting, mandated disciplinary requirements are sometimes ign

So much of what's been published on the topic of global warming has been so politically driven that I've remained firmly agnostic, especially with regard to AGW (anthropogenic global warming). Many of the statements supporting the premise that AGW is a huge threat come from folk who are no more expert on the topic than I am. However, a German by the name of Storch, who seems to be a genuine scientist working on the topic, recently published the results of an extensive anonymous survey of scientists who are actually knowledgeable in the field. The consensus, while generally reporting that

Some are comparing letting girls into BSA, with letting gays in. It's not the same Most parents -- even in California -- don't want their children having sex on camping trips. Period. Granted, there are exceptions to everything, but I seriously doubt that you could build a BSA, or anything like it with the exceptions. If you let girls in, it's easy to put the girls in tents over there, and the guys in tents over here, and the leaders in between. Granted, there could be sneaking around, but it would require that a tent-full of girls and another one of guys agree, and keep the secret.

What seems to be absent from these discussions, both with respect to the BSA and the military, is the recognition that sleeping arrangements are a core issue. My own son attends a primarily evangelical home-school academy with a gay boy who's about 90% out. I suspect, but don't know, that he may be a refugee from the public schools because of harassment. Of course, there is no sexual or romantic contact among anyone at the home-school academy, so overt behavior is not an issue. I don't know how many other parents are aware of this boy, but I would guess the majority are. If there's been a

I said I was going to finish replying, but I'm not. I shouldn't have started in the first place. It's not what I need to spend time on right now. And, I made matters worse by exhibiting the same sort of arrogance I accused Voyageur of. It's too late to stop when I shudda, but I can stop now, so I am. GaHillBilly

@ Gern: I didn't realize you were fully serious. The UN guys seem to me to be proposing "environmental religion", not as something they personally consider fact-based, but as a tool for social manipulation. Such an attitude has a long history in Western culture, particularly since the 'Enlightenment'. But it's always been insincere, in the same manner as a school teacher who uses her putative belief in Santa Claus as a tool to manipulate 1st graders behavior the weeks before Christmas. But, if you actually worship Nature, I have to respect your sincerity. I will ask to to

@ packsaddle => On page 4: "The environment should compete with religion as the only compelling, value-based narrative available to humanity. To do that, however, it will have to make itself relevant well beyond the world of those already concerned with the environment, including very prominently its own formal constituency. Indeed, unless UNEP succeeds in recasting the debate, it is highly likely that the economic community will do itbadly, and on its own terms. It is already happening in the field of climate change." The phrase, "the only compelling, value-based narrative availabl

@ Shortridge: The file is a PDF: www.iisd.org/pdf/2007/unep_we_want.pdf @ Gern: "Isn't nature God?" Not in any religion, except modern half-a-brain environmentalism. It's often stated that animistic religions worshiped nature, but it's far more accurate to say that they worshiped the demonic spirits inhabiting various entities (trees, etc.) in nature. "Why mock those who believe in that, no matter what they call it?" Uh-h-h, assuming you are serious, for the same reason you mock snake-handlers! (See "half-a-brain", above.) A couple of years ago, my son had a col

It's not new, but *I* just found it: http://www.michaelcrichton.net/speech-environmentalismaseligion.html It's a great analysis, by the Jurassic Park "Crichton", about how ignorant urbanites, environmentalists and liberals generally have deified "Nature", without having a very clear idea of what "Nature" is . . . or what it's like. He hit so many of the points I've made in the past while ranting about how Scout leaders with NKDD (nature knowledge deficit disorder) screw up Scouting that I just felt obligated to post the link. But, since his academic credentials (Harvard summa/pb

RememberSchiff wrote: "GAHB - Some of us think in pictures." You're right, of course, that some do think in pictures. I should have remembered, because though my older son and I both had chemistry in college, he's much better, in part because somehow he 'sees' those molecules and proteins. But, he still has to communicate in words, and all the wild gesticulations he's prone to, as he 'draws' the molecules in the air, don't really help much. And you are entirely correct to note that not all experts -- who possess real skill or knowledge -- also teach well. On the other hand,

Fscouter wrote: "More proof that training is worthless. Or rather perhaps that training is worthless if don't want any value from it." No, more EVIDENCE that misguided or out-of-order training is worthless. The difference is distinguishable by those who are not trying to dismiss criticism with careless sarcasm. "Proof", like "pregnancy" is not a matter of degree. You either are, or are not, pregnant. There either is, or there is not, "proof"*. The difference matters because people not only speak in words, they think in words as well. Sloppy word use not only renders precise

acco40 wrote: 'While I don't dispute anything in your post, please remember that Wood Badge and EDGE are not "scout skills" type courses but more "process" type courses.' Of course. I noted this myself. And there's nothing wrong with process . . . as long as there is SOMETHING to 'process'. But, taking Hamlet out of context, "aye, there's the rub". Given the sort of leaders and Scouts we've encountered, there is NOTHING to process, because they don't have the skills and knowledge that the Scouting EDGE proposes to teach! And everything I've seen suggests such Scouts and such lea

Early in this thread, it was stated that it was the "trained leaders" who were "myth-busters". I'm glad that is true in your Council, but it most definitely is not, in my area. At OLS, we were taught by Wood-Badged trainers that: 1. sheath knives were prohibited, 2. patrols could not camp alone (I provoked this, by asking), 3. and, that liquid fuels were not allowed. In addition (and I'm holding grudge about this one), I let the Wood-badged knife / axe trainer demonstrate knife sharpening on my 15 year old 'I won't leave the house without it' Gerber EZ-Out. It was useless for the

I didn't intend this to be a post about LNT, and I regret that my grumpiness got away from me. But, I also regret that my grumpiness gave y'all an easy way out, and allowed you to ignore the substantive portions of my posts. The facts are simple: + LNT is NOT just a title; people take it literally, and there's evidence of that on this forum, as well as in my experience at OLS. My guess is that many of you can recall further evidences of this, if you'd only choose to do so. + The LNT interpretive statements are themselves incompatible with wood craft and junior naturalists -- B

Ok, I am grumpy about this. But, unfortunately even after you allow for my grumpiness, the problem doesn't disappear. From an adult perspective, most of us have learned that Santa Claus doesn't really bring gifts; that drinking beer will not make me attractive to hot girls, but will just make me fat; and that regardless of who wins the Presidential race, they won't keep most of their promises because they can't. But youth and young people are "idealistic". This means they still, to a greater or lesser degree, believe that we actually MEAN what we tell them. Over time, they disc

Lisa, I agree with most of what you said -- and had already made the point that correlation is not causation. But I think you'll agree correlation offers a reason to investigate whether there is only incidental correlation, or if there is also causation. And, that was what I did in my original question. BobW, your misdirection aside (quoting all the wildlife bits EXCEPT the one I quoted) if you think you can walk in the woods without causing any "animal [to] alter its normal activities" -- unless you choose to regard fleeing possible predators as 'normal activity' -- there's not much I ca

SR540Beaver wrote "I always find it amusing that those who are critical of the BSA program always blame Wood Badge." SR540Beaver, before you "find it amusing", you might want to "find it"! In this case, you didn't, because I didn't "blame" anyone. I noticed a coincidence: 1) all (or most) of the instructors were WBers. 2) a number of the instructors taught undocumented 'requirements'. But, because I know a bit about logic, I understand that "coincidence" is not "causation". In other words, I knew that the relationship between WBers and undoc'd requirements might be incidenta