[SecretMaster]

Teaching evolution within a species is perfectly fine. Teaching evolution as the origin of a species crosses into the area of hypothesis rather than proven fact. The "fact" is that, despite this hypothesis, biology has not been able to reproduce the creation of an organic organism from inorganic materials, nor has it been able to provide an unbroken link from organic to inorganic material.

I don't think there is anything wrong with teaching that organisms evolved and developed from other organisms. The fact of the matter is, we have a pretty good idea of the evolution of cells and organisms. Of course there are holes and unknown factors, but there is a connected line that can trace ourselves back. I do think it will be mighty hard, if not impossible to pinpoint when exactly life started and how.

But as far as the development of life, sure there is a good understanding of things. We can trace ourselves all the way back to the eukarya domain. Where eukarya, archae and bacteria developed out of is anyones guess. But just because we cannot pinpoint or prove the beginning doesn't mean it should be dismissed. Again, so much understanding of the world comes from this.

I always find it interesting that the religious always sit there and exclaim "but they are hypothesis! you cannot prove them and thus you are wrong!" meanwhile their explanation has done so very little to contribute to the realm of knowledge, and quite frankly their explanation is much more unproven and unsubstantiated than what current science has to offer.

Magik has provided several links and examples of articles that contradict the alarmists science of "global warming" (many of which were posted on the "other" forum that shall not be named). Even SecretMaster concedes that the real scientists doing real research on the issue may be not be right. But, that's not what you hear on the news and from the media. To listen to them is to believe that global warming (and man's responsibility for causing it) are foregone conclusions (much the same as evolution is presented as a foregone conclusion, even though there is evidence that contradicts it as well).

I would like to see links to such articles. If they are the ones I am thinking of, I can address those to the best of my ability.

And I'm going to further enforce what I said earlier. Is global warming being exaggerated and being played the alarmist card by the media? Absolutely. The biggest thing the scientific community can benefit from right now is people who can properly communicate to the general public as to what their research is finding and what it means. There is a lot of resentment towards the media which has made a mockery out of a serious issue. Prophetic and catastrophic claims only harm what is a genuine problem.

There is a good collection of data to suggest that humans are influencing the climate (note! not every place will see increases in temperature!). For every widely publicized article that claims to refute and dismiss this idea (often subject to sensationalism I might add), you can find another that says the exact opposite. In fact, I'd wager there are more publications supporting the current beliefs, not trying to dismiss them.

Organic does not organism make.

I don't even know what that means. Clarification please?