Jump to content

Miss Ignorance Usa


SillyString
 Share

Recommended Posts




This video of the Miss USA 2011 contestants displays the core of the issue regarding science education. The vast majority of these people do not understand what science is or how it works. The vast majority of these people do not understand what evolution is or how it works. They seem to equate the acceptance of a consensus scientific understanding with belief. They seem to think that there are two sides of some debate. This is what you get when ideology and religion is allowed to dictate education policy regarding what is science.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This video of the Miss USA 2011 contestants displays the core of the issue regarding science education. The vast majority of these people do not understand what science is or how it works. The vast majority of these people do not understand what evolution is or how it works. They seem to equate the acceptance of a consensus scientific understanding with belief. They seem to think that there are two sides of some debate. This is what you get when ideology and religion is allowed to dictate education policy regarding what is science.[/size][/font]

 

 

That's almost point for point the same thing I said about the global warming debate in that related thread today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am real vocal in my community concerning ideas of creationism or intelligent design being taught in our local schools as an alternative to science. I am strongly opposed to teaching it on the same level as science and evolution. Talking heads on television and beautiful and ignorant women advocating a right to know 'both side' fuels the debate. I think America really dumbs-down every time someone claims someone else has the right to decide for themselves. That would be fine IF creationism or intelligent design were based on sound reasoning and scientific data instead of claiming the world was created by invisible super friends, magic, and an all powerful sky-daddy!

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

at least SOME of those girls seem to have their head on straight whilst trying not to offend the christards in their phrasing. Most seem to say "both sides should be presented".

 

Here's how I would do it.

 

 

Side One= research, evidence, fossil records, building on past data when new data is discovered, etc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Side Two= Magic Goddiddit

 

 

 

 

presumably Side Two could be covered in about 10 mins max.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

presumably Side Two could be covered in about 10 mins max.

And that's what we did in the last Anthropology class I took.

 

Yes, Intelligent Design was part of the discussion. It was talked in the chapter about "scientific method" and how it works. And ID/Creationism was discarded just because it can't be tested or falsified. It's a non-scientific hypothesis. So yes, it took about 10 minutes. (And the Christians in the class were disappointed...)

 

It's funny. The Bible says that you should never test God. Well, science is about testing. And ID is about God, which can't be tested, so ID can't be a science according to the Bible!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am real vocal in my community concerning ideas of creationism or intelligent design being taught in our local schools as an alternative to science. I am strongly opposed to teaching it on the same level as science and evolution. Talking heads on television and beautiful and ignorant women advocating a right to know 'both side' fuels the debate. I think America really dumbs-down every time someone claims someone else has the right to decide for themselves. That would be fine IF creationism or intelligent design were based on sound reasoning and scientific data instead of claiming the world was created by invisible super friends, magic, and an all powerful sky-daddy!

 

Well said and good for you Heretic! clap.gif

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's funny. The Bible says that you should never test God. Well, science is about testing. And ID is about God, which can't be tested, so ID can't be a science according to the Bible!

 

 

Exactly. Creationism will never be scientific and shouldn't be taught as some kind of alternative.

 

Evolution is theory AND fact, and should be the only thing taught in a science classroom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw a stupid commercial for the this pagent the other day.

 

It asked "what will she look like?" I responded "exactly like the other 49-50 girls up there"

 

I hate these pagents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why even pose a scientific question to these walking mammary glands? (apologies ladies of intellect)

 

Back when I was at high school the girls schools offered domestic science aka home ed where they learned to bake and cook, training to be good lil' housewives and walking incubators.

 

My sister did this and basic biology (birds and the bees stuff) but never the physics and chemistry hard stuff or real biology. She got the proverbial secretarial position with the local newspaper and posed (apparently naked) once behind a huge sombrero, she told us all she has a bikini on. My dad as you can imagine, a very pious xian, was outraged as she had disgraced him and the guud family name.:grin:

 

Now she believes in creationism but is not dogmatic. Dont ask her anything about evolution, she has absolutely no clue.

 

The point is, these lasses obviously do not have any scientific acumen and are using their "god given" asses err... I mean assets to land a big fish, you know a hunk with a cute SUV or Hummer and lotz of daddies noveuriche (sp?) wealth to elevate them up the social order/ladder.

 

They should actually ask them for their mom's apple pie recipe as that may conjure up some modicum of "intelligent" discourse.

 

Of course, being a man, the eye candy is beautiful to behold. :wicked:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Babylonian Dream

These women are so stupid and annoying, tis one of the reasons I don't like Miss America. Besides the fact that its the creator if the dumb blonde and women are idiots stereotype, it makes it look like anorexia is beautiful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator

It isn't just those young women who are not educated properly. Each generation seems to know less and less about science, history, geography and the English language. Religion, of course, doesn't help matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator

To the schools who teach (or want to teach) creationism -- maybe your schools should teach Stork Theory so the kids won't learn the real science of reproduction either. Yeah, that's it. Give the students a choice. They can believe storks bring da babies or they can learn that screwing around does. It's a personal matter of which theory to choose to believe in. Oh, wait. Even better -- let's teach the Virgin Birth Theory. WendyDoh.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It isn't just those young women who are not educated properly. Each generation seems to know less and less about science, history, geography and the English language. Religion, of course, doesn't help matters.

 

Adding the higher levels of illiteracy or very rudimentary education of rural areas to the aforementioned characteristics, the PRI's advantages in the countryside became clear.(21) So, the PRI for decades supported a pattern of rural development that led to caciquismo which itself benefited the PRI at election time, furthering its capacity to control the institutions of the Mexican state.

http://www2.kenyon.edu/Depts/PSci/Fac/klesner/Electoral_Reform_in_Mexico.htm

 

http://www.stanford.edu/class/polisci313/papers/demz0.07.06.pdf

9The best statistical analysis of major national funding programs show two results. First,

typically there is no relationship between various indicators associated with the program’s goals

and spending. The distribution of funds for education, for example, seem unrelated to measures of

education need or potential. Second, regardless of the program’s nominal purpose, the PRI

allocates these funds for political purposes, such as helping it win elections in marginal districts.

 

Translation: The ruling party in Mexico, PRI, largely maintained its stranglehold on the country for over 60 years using a policy of dumbing down the country folk, who made up the largest part of their voting bloc. In fact, rural Mexico had an average of a 3rd grade education, making them the most vulnerable to populist campaign rhetoric at election time.

 

Guess which class of Mexicans wades the river to become illegal workers in the US btw...

 

 

On a completely unrelated subject, I just discovered a weird glitch in Google. I attempted to search for "Partido Revolucionario Institucional", which Google translated correctly to "PRI" but then it gave me results from the acronym, which were completely unrelated to the Mexican political party. I had to do an advanced search and filter by .edu results in order to grab what I was looking for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back when I was at high school the girls schools offered domestic science aka home ed where they learned to bake and cook, training to be good lil' housewives and walking incubators.

 

I was at some historical thing somewhere (don't remember details, it was a while ago) from the time before women could attend university. They talked about how there were special schools to teach women "home economics". Except, unlike the housewife training you'd think of today, they literally taught them economics, budgeting, finance. Because the woman running the household while the guy worked meant hiring lots of servants and just generally being more of a manager than doing all the work herself. I think this only applied to upper class women who could hire lower class servants to do all the manual labor. I'm still not decided on how sexist that is; it seems like it may have been slightly less sexist than today but a whole lot more classist. I also remember feeling angry that today, women are told (by society, if not explicitly) that to be desirable to men they should also be bad at math, whereas back then being good at math was expected of a proper wife.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was at some historical thing somewhere (don't remember details, it was a while ago) from the time before women could attend university. They talked about how there were special schools to teach women "home economics". Except, unlike the housewife training you'd think of today, they literally taught them economics, budgeting, finance. Because the woman running the household while the guy worked meant hiring lots of servants and just generally being more of a manager than doing all the work herself. I think this only applied to upper class women who could hire lower class servants to do all the manual labor. I'm still not decided on how sexist that is; it seems like it may have been slightly less sexist than today but a whole lot more classist. I also remember feeling angry that today, women are told (by society, if not explicitly) that to be desirable to men they should also be bad at math, whereas back then being good at math was expected of a proper wife.

Home economics was the word I was looking for. That was also offered in lieu of math and this would be a real basic book keeping course.

 

This was the uniform of my sister's school in 1952, it never changed when she attended in the 60's and 70's

1942-Evelyn-Prefects-MTurnbull-AShawe-BSmith-LHowell-JMattinson-Seated-GRidler-MSkinner-JWallace-RAbrahamson.jpg

Note the deliberate design to hide the breast outline :eek:

 

We had separate schools under the British system and that was to keep the lust levels down.:lmao:

 

I attended a boys only technical school and her school and ours were sort of linked for proms and stuff like that, both were boarding schools. If you have seen some of the movies of Brit girl schools (for the upper class aka finishing schools) this is how the boarding schools were where I did my schooling.

 

Of course come weekends, it was all in civies and we could lust all over each other.:wicked:

 

The school my sister attended did offer the higher ed studies but these were the geeks of the school in those days. Of course no makeup, not even eyeliner was allowed.

 

It didn't work as there were still teen pregnancies and shotgun weddings.

 

It is still like that here in SA to some extent and the school my daughter attended, the uniform was a skirt and white blouse with a compulsory loose fitting jumper that they had to wear throughout the year. Maybe dialing down the sexuality does help to some extent. Hers was coed school but some of the stigma still remains.

 

Of course the schools offer free condoms available on request so teen pregnancies are on the decline, more a side benefit of the fight against AIDS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That picture is kinda creepy. Part that amuses me is how all the skirts are to just above the knee. I can't wear skirts that short because, uh, my posture isn't "feminine" enough for that to be decent. My (private christian) high school in the US went to uniforms in an attempt to prevent the females from displaying any individuality or sexuality, and on chapel days we were required to wear the skirts (rest of the week we could wear pants). They were knee length, pleated and thus kinda poofy/full, and treated with scotchguard (be afraid of any clothes treated with upholstery chemicals!) so they were stiff and wouldn't collapse the way the softer fabrics I was used to would. And then we had to wear those while sitting on bleachers that people could fit under. I always felt really uncomfortable about that; so much for modesty!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was at some historical thing somewhere (don't remember details, it was a while ago) from the time before women could attend university. They talked about how there were special schools to teach women "home economics". Except, unlike the housewife training you'd think of today, they literally taught them economics, budgeting, finance. Because the woman running the household while the guy worked meant hiring lots of servants and just generally being more of a manager than doing all the work herself. I think this only applied to upper class women who could hire lower class servants to do all the manual labor. I'm still not decided on how sexist that is; it seems like it may have been slightly less sexist than today but a whole lot more classist. I also remember feeling angry that today, women are told (by society, if not explicitly) that to be desirable to men they should also be bad at math, whereas back then being good at math was expected of a proper wife.

Home economics was the word I was looking for. That was also offered in lieu of math and this would be a real basic book keeping course.

 

This was the uniform of my sister's school in 1952, it never changed when she attended in the 60's and 70's

1942-Evelyn-Prefects-MTurnbull-AShawe-BSmith-LHowell-JMattinson-Seated-GRidler-MSkinner-JWallace-RAbrahamson.jpg

Note the deliberate design to hide the breast outline :eek:

 

We had separate schools under the British system and that was to keep the lust levels down.:lmao:

 

I attended a boys only technical school and her school and ours were sort of linked for proms and stuff like that, both were boarding schools. If you have seen some of the movies of Brit girl schools (for the upper class aka finishing schools) this is how the boarding schools were where I did my schooling.

 

Of course come weekends, it was all in civies and we could lust all over each other.:wicked:

 

The school my sister attended did offer the higher ed studies but these were the geeks of the school in those days. Of course no makeup, not even eyeliner was allowed.

 

It didn't work as there were still teen pregnancies and shotgun weddings.

 

It is still like that here in SA to some extent and the school my daughter attended, the uniform was a skirt and white blouse with a compulsory loose fitting jumper that they had to wear throughout the year. Maybe dialing down the sexuality does help to some extent. Hers was coed school but some of the stigma still remains.

 

Of course the schools offer free condoms available on request so teen pregnancies are on the decline, more a side benefit of the fight against AIDS.

 

 

Ummm...the unsexy uniform is not working. Front row far-right chick gave me a semi. :wicked: I wonder what nursing home she is in. :grin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well some of them said somthing inteligent. personaly i thought miss Alabama was pretty funny at the begining

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ummm...the unsexy uniform is not working. Front row far-right chick gave me a semi. :wicked: I wonder what nursing home she is in. :grin:

LoL I guess we are just pervs over generations. The google pic said it was from 1942 but I doubt the knee high skirts were in fashion or allowed back then. My guess even at 1952, many of them have passed.

 

Oh and lusting for them at that time was OK as these were all 17-18 yo and the legal age there was 16 w/o threat of statutory rape.

 

My brother's 1st wife was shy of 16 by 3 months and attended that school when he got her knocked up, they had to get a special license to marry. Idiot.

 

Reminds me of the joke;

 

What did the pair of knickerbockers say to the panties?

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

I've had my ups and downs, but have never been pushed aside.:HaHa:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw a stupid commercial for the this pagent the other day.

 

It asked "what will she look like?" I responded "exactly like the other 49-50 girls up there"

 

I hate these pagents.

 

I absolutely loath pageants. If I were a dictator, I would completely abolish them and imprision any mother who would subject her prepubescent child to a beauty pageant for child abuse.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw a stupid commercial for the this pagent the other day.

 

It asked "what will she look like?" I responded "exactly like the other 49-50 girls up there"

 

I hate these pagents.

 

I absolutely loath pageants. If I were a dictator, I would completely abolish them and imprision any mother who would subject her prepubescent child to a beauty pageant for child abuse.

 

Yeah I sometimes feel that way too. Especially when my wife wants to watch toddlers and tiaras

 

That show is f'd up.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.