Aurelius Venport wrote:

Classes are where you go to learn things.

On Sun, 01 Apr 2007 21:33:38 GMT, in alt.atheism , Aurelius Venport
in wrote:

Nope, science *classes* are for teaching people. Then those that want
to become scientists can take that knowledge and use it to learn
things that we don't already know.

"Aurelius Venport" wrote in message
news:SyVPh.3910$P84.2382@trnddc07...

No, it would be called imparting knowledge.

Mike Painter wrote:

then that would be a waste of time.

Denis Loubet wrote:

Most science courses focus on the adaptation and survival of
life-forms instead of on the more central question of the very origin of
life. You may have noted that attempts to explain where life came from
are usually presented in generalizations such as: ‘Over millions of
years, molecules in collision somehow produced life.’ Yet, is that
really satisfying? It would mean that in the presence of energy from the
sun, lightning, or volcanoes, some lifeless matter moved, became
organized, and eventually started living—all of this without directed
assistance. What a huge leap that would have been! From nonliving matter
to living! Could it have occurred that way? all by pure chance?