>

By that logic then, I would assume that they are ok with banning religion in all forms in schools as that is just a bunch of shit you can’t prove 100%.
The legislation’s sponsor says by banning scientific theories, the policy aims to prevent kids from being taught things that aren’t true.

I think I have to go sit down for a while. I don't know how to process such an absurd sentence. I don't understand how there are adults, who were voted into office, in this world, in this time period, who...
We have passed peak IQ. We're done. >

I feel like I read that IQ did peak in the 90s because of CO2 in the atmosphere. I can't find it now though so don't treat that like a fact or anything. Good thing I'm not in Montana. >

Well no, it's a hypothesis. It would be difficult proving a causal link with so many confounding variables. >

Now, I ain't no country chicken, and I'm not a city lawyer.  I do however, know for a fact, that when two men sit down together to share a casual link at breakfast, it by no means has to be Jimmy Dean, and I can call those men homophrodites.  It is well within my rights under the first commandment to throw stones at those who have sinned.  I rest my face. >

This feels so Futurama >

Exactly ~~what~~ where I was ~~ripping off~~ drawing inspiration from! >

Maybe they should require a GED to hold public office in Montana? >

Lauren Bobert has entered the chat. >

Only took her what, three tries?
Still better than McCarthy's speaker vote! >

The fact she won at all. And the won reelection is why I've lost all faith in humanity. >

The fact that she barely won in my Uber conservative district, restored my faith in humanity. >

This is what a lot of people don't get.  They redistricted to what should have been a more favorable demographic and she baaaaaarely won.  Lots of people regardless of political affiliation hate her.  I was not amused when I realized that my rep was now her after the redistricting.  Fuck that bitch, hopefully we can muster enough people next time around. >

How is it still legal to "redistrict" an area to affect election outcomes? I ask out of genuine curiosity, as a non-American. I'm pretty sure that can't be done where I am from. >

State legislatures draw the districts on maps. They are told how many districts they have to draw bu the federal Congress. Then partisan legislators try to draw as many 51% districts that they can for their side while packing as many of their opponents into a single district that they can. So whoever wins the most state legislature seats wields a lot of power when we do a census and redistrict every 10 years. >

That sounds sketchy as hell. >

That's because it is. >


The bill is sponsored by freshman Republican Senator Daniel Emrich from Great Falls. In his testimony, Emrich said the bill would make sure students are taught what a scientific fact is.  
"If we operate on the assumption that a theory is fact, unfortunately, it leads us to asking questions that may be potentially based on false assumptions," Emrich said.

Emrich stringing words together will no basic understanding of the scientific method. >

Some Dem should agree with him and insist on an addition that requires that all schools should have to teach that no religion has any basis in provable fact. After all, we don't want our children being taught information that can't be proven, now do we? >

But the Bible says ... >

Well, if it's in the Bible, then it must be true!  How do we know this?  Well, the Bible says so!  Q.E.D. >

And thus God vanished in a puff of logic. (There’s some Douglas Adams quote that goes after the QED). >

Then man went on to prove that black is white and got himself killed at the next zebra crossing. >

Not living in the UK, it took me YEARS to realize "zebra crossing" is a name for the marked off pedestrian crossing lanes.
I thought he was trampled by hooves. >

I missed the joke that Ford had misidentified the dominant species on earth and that's why he called himself Ford Prefect.  A Prefect is a car model only in the UK. >

"If we operate on the assumption that a theory is fact, unfortunately, 
it leads us to asking questions that may be potentially based on false 
assumptions," Emrich said
Clearly he has no idea what the definition of scientific theory is, what it does, how it is arrived at and how science advances by the repeated examination of theories works. He could probably do with a good BA degree, if he could get into college that is. >

We learned the scientific method in middle school on the East coast. I had no idea what kind of weaponized ignorance we were up against until this day. >

If we consider the theory of gravity in our calculations, we might be making a false assumption. Better to not get involved in anything requiring the understanding of falling objects. >

I’ll let go of an anvil over him. After all, it’s just a theory the anvil will fall downwards, for all we know it could fall upwards. >

This is actually true. There is no guarantee that gravity isn't a force that changes polarity every 2 trillion years or something. >

Right, but scientific theories are there to help us predict what will happen. And the odds of gravity changing in such a way would be incomprehensible small and not even worth considering. >

Maybe, if gravity was a particle's position at a given time.  It's not.  It's a fundamental force.  Also that's not strictly the purpose of a theory.  A theory is just the best explanation of a phenomenon based on all possible information.  Yes, some parts of a theory will be refined over time but it's not suddenly going to be false because chance. >

I recommend him climbing a tall ladder and testing out the "theory of gravity" and tell us what he thinks afterwards. >

Parachute use has not been shown to decrease deaths. So he should not use a parachute when he skydives. >

This is the funniest paper ive ever read >

There is a radiology paper that I read a long time ago that quantified different sayings for frequency. Something like “once in a blue moon” means 1.4% of the time. I wish that I had saved it. >

Some cursory research did not locate this article. damn it sounds hilarious >

It’s one of my greatest professional regrets that I did not copy the paper that I held in my hands. >

Man, this Bill guy sounds like an asshole. >

Honestly, who is this Bill guy? I hear about him pretty often and he tends to have a lot of bad ideas. Not sure why the media pays him so much attention.