Think Gene - Latest Comments in Evolution on Televison

Re: Evolution on Televison

drewyates — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 10:26:13 -0000

Cartoons don't need to have "a message," but there's a difference between saying something of substance and merely looking like it. For example, papers we write in high school and college are written to LOOK like they mean something, not actually to discuss ideas. There's a specific pattern to it, and it's obvious to me, at least.

Re: Evolution on Televison

Jasper — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 10:11:35 -0000

Do all the cartoons need to have a huge message to it? I agree on the merits of the South Park show. However, family guy's episode has a point too, intelligent design does not explain anything beyond magically appearing fully-formed lifeforms. Not that this approach is particularly usefull in convincing anyone.
The Simpsons, well it is a somewhat funny movie, but i like the older episodes better, but i cant say they shouldnt try make new ones.

Re: Evolution on Televison

Josh Hill — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 03:56:43 -0000

I personally thought the Simpson's one was the best.

John C: I think that's actually a really great way to solve the problem. I wish more states adopted laws similar to Oregons'.

Re: Evolution on Televison

John C — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 02:23:30 -0000

In the State of Oregon, this 'matter' was solved in a different way. The science was taught on school property and the religeous view was presented off of school property. At my grade school in Eugene, there was a bus parked across the street that was connected to electrical power from the pole. This bus served as a class room for the religeous (usually a small segment of Christianity) view.