Intelligent Design/Evolution War:4-20-06 Georgia Governor signs Laws putting Bible Class in all schools and Commandments

[dgevert]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Why is evolution even taught at all in a science class? What does the knowledge of evolution give you that helps you understand chemistry or physics or geography or biology? Is this not just more liberal hippy teachers trying, and succeeding obviously, to brainwash impressionable kids to hating religeon as much as they do?

Why would evolution be taught in a science class? Hmm, maybe because it's science? Furthermore, much like the other major fields of science have their unifying theories, evolution is actually THE unifying theory

Evolution says nothing about religion. It is not incompatible with it. I have never heard a biologist tell me that I should "hate religion" while teaching me about evolution. I accepted evolution long before I began rejecting irrational god-beliefs.

Furthermore, if anyone is guilty of brainwashing, it's the Creationists. Who tries to teach kids to only believe one thing and not think for themselves? Who teaches people to believe without faith? The Christians. I, like many, was made to go to church from the time I was old enough to talk. Did I have the rational capacity to analyze the assertions made by the preacher at that age? No.

When I was introduced to evolution in school, I had begun to develop that capacity, and I had already learned what science was and how it works. There's a huge difference between the tactics of the creationists and the evolution supporters. You want to see this for yourself? Go read AnswersInGenesis's mission statement, or even the Institute for Creation Research's.

Furthermore, which side has supporters who try to claim false credentials by bragging about their PhDs that they bought from diploma mills? "Dr." Kent Hovind is on your side, my friend...not mine.

I never said the lack of evidence disproves evolution. I will acknowledge it as a possible theory. Too bad the same can't be said form the rabid liberals who won't open their minds to consider any alternative that involves God. That probably says something doesn't it?

For crying out loud, how many times does this have to be said? The only ones who want to introduce a conflict between a belief in god(s) and evolution are the Christian fundamentalists. Are you dense?

 

[dgevert]

Originally posted by: rususa
i agree with all this except for the part about evolution fitting the evidence. Unfortunately, evolution is more of a dogma than a scientific theory. Correct me if I'm wrong but part of being a theory involves making predictions and verifying that your theory is correct. As far as I know, nobody has done or can do that with large-scale evolution. So it essentially remains unfalsifiable because it can never be tested and proven wrong.

Evolution is not dogma. It does indeed make predictions, and it is indeed falsifiable. It's not evolutionary science's fault you're ignorant.

Evolutionary prediction: we will see evidence of common features inherited in species. Do we see this? Yes
Evolutionary prediction: the pattern of similiarities will match in species believed to have evolved from common ancestors; regardless of what biological features are being analyzed. Is this true? Yes: Compare junk DNA among species, and then compare it to the pattern of similiarities shown by comparing the cytochrome C protein among species. Then compare it to the pattern shown by the fossil record. Then compare it to the pattern shown by the rest of DNA. Then compare it to...you get the point.

The other thing that really p!sses me off is that every single time somebody tries to bring up valid scientific criticism against evolution, they're completely blown of as a creationist (assuming the ACLU doesn't sue them for publically endorsing religion). The stickers at the beginning didn't say anything untrue, and they said nothing about religion. Why are they being ordered off books like pornography or something. It seems to me that a truly rational society would let students realize that it's possible the precious theory of evolution might be wrong. Be we can't admit that because we'd be supporting state religion.

Okay, here's the thing: creationists *want* to make it seem like evolution is controversial. They want to define it this way. The facts are that evolution hasn't been controversial for more than a hundred years. You can't sit here and tell me the motivation behind those stickers was pure and honest; otherwise, why aren't the people who put them there in the first place trying to place similiar stickers on physics textbooks?

 

[dgevert]

Hey, creationists! Explain this

Image

 

[dgevert]

Who is guilty oWho is guilty of brainwashing?

Before WorldHelp changed its Web site on Wednesday, it contained an appeal for funds that described the Aceh people as "strict Sunni Muslims" who "have been very instrumental in spreading Islam throughout Indonesia and other parts of Southeast Asia." Normally, it said, "Banda Aceh is closed to foreigners and closed to the gospel. But, because of this catastrophe, our partners there are earning the right to be heard and providing entrance for the gospel."

The fundraising appeal went on to say that WorldHelp was working with Christian partners in Indonesia who want to "plant Christian principles as early as possible" in the 300 Muslim children.

 

[Rainsford]

You know what I always find so amusing about the whole evolution/creationist argument? The idea of creationism, presumably, is to move the beliefs of Christianity into the scientific field. In other words, to cram a round peg into a square hole. But that doesn't stop people from trying, and all this alternative theory BS is just the tip of the iceberg.

But here's the problem, evolution has been examined and re-examined by many of the finest scientific minds today and in the past. Creationism is, for the most part, pushed by "concerned parents" and religious people with PhD's in sociology or something. In other words, creationism, as a scientific theory, has more in common with alien abductions than evolution. You can't escape the simple truth that evolution is more mature, and was developed based on scientific principle, while creationism was not.

Actually the most amusing part is the "only a theory" warning, clearly designed by and for people who have no idea what a theory is.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
I think the school officials in Cobb County that started this nonsense need to be stickered. I'd recommend that the sticker say: "Warning! I'm an IDiot ... please don't ask me important questions!"

Don't forget the 2,000 plus Bible Belter Parents that pressured the School "Official" to put the stickers on.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: conjur
And, Creationists? Which method of creation is the right one? The Bible offers two creation stories in Genesis.

BTW, I think anyone who thinks the book of Genesis is a blueprint for the creation of the universe should read this:
Who Wrote the Bible? - Richard Elliott Friedman

Anyone?

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Also, real quick. How long according to the theory of evolution has mankind, in our current form, been in existence?

Isn't it something like hundreds of thousands of years for homo sapien sapien?

 

[crooked22]

They do not subvert scientific education any more than your statement does. The statement on the sticker is true that the theory is not a fact, a theory CANNOT be a fact by definition. A theory can be said to be factual, but never a fact itself. The observed event is the fact, the theory is a statement explaining why it happened. The theory of gravity is not a fact, rather the apple falling from the tree to the ground is; ditto with natual selection and adapation (the fact) and the theory of evolution (the explanation of the fact).

I think creationists like to be selective when they confuse theory with a hypothesis... which is just an assumption.

 

[Infohawk]

Dear Creationists,

We'll put these stickers on our science textbooks when you put "God's existence is a theory, not a fact" on your bibles.

From slashdot

 

[Starbuck1975]

Faith and science rarely mix well, and evolution vs creationism is one of those hot button topics that always creates quite a stir.

In highly religious communities, I can understand why parents would not want their children to learn about evolution, or perhaps dismiss evolution as a mere theory...imagine if there was something you believed in greatly, and wanted your children to believe in as well...you would probably go through the same measures to prevent your child from being exposed to that which challenges, offends or otherwise contradicts your beliefs...granted, I think that the most healthy environment is one where you have to challenge your beliefs, and are forced to see things from the perspectives of others...but I also accept that not everyone thinks the way I do.

I think faith and evolution are compatible if you are willing to accept that the Bible is not factual, but that its themes are a healthy guide for living a good life and being a good person...even with evolution, taking things all the way back to the Big Bang...well it had to start somewhere...and those of faith can believe that somewhere or something is God, others can believe whatever they wish.

 

[Starbuck1975]

We'll put these stickers on our science textbooks when you put "God's existence is a theory, not a fact" on your bibles.

The Bible is not required reading in classrooms, but science textbooks are...perhaps a better analogy would be to educate children with the Bible and the science textbook, and let them make their own decisions about what they believe in.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

We'll put these stickers on our science textbooks when you put "God's existence is a theory, not a fact" on your bibles.

The Bible is not required reading in classrooms, but science textbooks are...perhaps a better analogy would be to educate children with the Bible and the science textbook, and let them make their own decisions about what they believe in.

Why don't we go a step further and present my favorite "theory" to the schools too: that the universe was created by invisible hippos from Ajilon 5. Then we can let the kids decide. What do you think of that idea?

 

[Tommunist]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

We'll put these stickers on our science textbooks when you put "God's existence is a theory, not a fact" on your bibles.

The Bible is not required reading in classrooms, but science textbooks are...perhaps a better analogy would be to educate children with the Bible and the science textbook, and let them make their own decisions about what they believe in.

You also have to teach them every other religion with a story of creation as well then.

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Also, real quick. How long according to the theory of evolution has mankind, in our current form, been in existence?

Isn't it something like hundreds of thousands of years for homo sapien sapien?

I think homo sapiens have only been around for 20,000 years IIRC. Humanoids existed before that though.

The Bible is not required reading in classrooms, but science textbooks are...perhaps a better analogy would be to educate children with the Bible and the science textbook, and let them make their own decisions about what they believe in.

But the Bible ISN"T science. There aren't facts to support creationism, it is not a scientific theory therefore it shouldn't be taugh side-by-side in a classroom with SCIENCE. Sure, teach kids what the Bible says in a philosophy class, hell teach them what the Kuran (sp?) says as well, but don't ever let them confuse religion (which is philosophy), with science (which is based in FACT).

 

[Starbuck1975]

Why don't we go a step further and present my favorite "theory" to the schools too: that the universe was created by invisible hippos from Ajilon 5. Then we can let the kids decide. What do you think of that idea?

When you establish enough supporters and evidence such that you can make a credible case for including your theory, sure...otherwise, I sugges the tin foil hat club to pass on your teachings.

You also have to teach them every other religion with a story of creation as well then

Religion is something that should be taught in the home, not in the classroom...similarly, if parents wish to shield their children from learning something in school, they have that right as well...the laws of physics or chemical reactions are hard science...evolution is still in a state of flux and debate...not to mention that if a majority of people in a community want schools to teach certain things, then the schools should adapt to those needs...to the schools serve the people or are the people subordinate to the schools?

But the Bible ISN"T science. There aren't facts to support creationism, it is not a scientific theory therefore it shouldn't be taugh side-by-side in a classroom with SCIENCE

I personally believe in evolution and think there is enough evidence to support it as a credible theory...however, we have yet to prove evolution as factual science beyond a reasonable doubt, and evolution, like religion, requires a leap of faith.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: BlinderBomber

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Also, real quick. How long according to the theory of evolution has mankind, in our current form, been in existence?

Isn't it something like hundreds of thousands of years for homo sapien sapien?

I think homo sapiens have only been around for 20,000 years IIRC. Humanoids existed before that though.

We're at least 45,000 years old.

The Seven Daughters of Eve: The Science That Reveals Our Genetic Ancestry

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

Why don't we go a step further and present my favorite "theory" to the schools too: that the universe was created by invisible hippos from Ajilon 5. Then we can let the kids decide. What do you think of that idea?

When you establish enough supporters and evidence such that you can make a credible case for including your theory, sure...otherwise, I sugges the tin foil hat club to pass on your teachings.

Why would he need evidence? There's no evidence for Creationism.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

When you establish enough supporters and evidence such that you can make a credible case for including your theory, sure...otherwise, I sugges the tin foil hat club to pass on your teachings.

Fine we'll throw in all the world's creationist theories-- there are a lot of them. And you seem to like appeals to popularity. Are you saying that if enough people were into my invisible hippo theory you would let it be taught in class?

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: BlinderBomber

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Also, real quick. How long according to the theory of evolution has mankind, in our current form, been in existence?

Isn't it something like hundreds of thousands of years for homo sapien sapien?

I think homo sapiens have only been around for 20,000 years IIRC. Humanoids existed before that though.

We're at least 45,000 years old.

The Seven Daughters of Eve: The Science That Reveals Our Genetic Ancestry

I'm still waiting for HeroOfPellinor's trap to unfold... He must have had something in mind when he asked the question. And based on my past experience with him, it's gotta' be a beauty.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Fine we'll throw in all the world's creationist theories-- there are a lot of them. And you seem to like appeals to popularity. Are you saying that if enough people were into my invisible hippo theory you would let it be taught in class?

Well I believe that the role of government is to serve the people, so if this is what the people want, then so be it...how do you think the religious right got so powerful in this country?

Why would he need evidence? There's no evidence for Creationism.

Because I am not a religious scholar, I cannot debate this point, although I would argue that if you ever have this discussion with someone of faith, they will point to evidence that from a scientific perspective has no merit but from a faith based perspective is perfectly acceptable.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
Well I believe that the role of government is to serve the people, so if this is what the people want, then so be it...how do you think the religious right got so powerful in this country?

So if a lot of people in the blue states wanted to teach how to kill religious people, it would be okay? Or if enough people in your community wanted to teach white supremacy it would be okay?

 

[SuperTool]

Should we put stickers on Math textbooks saying "Parallel lines not intersecting is only an axiom. It is not t theorem, and and hasn't been proven"

 

[Starbuck1975]

So if a lot of people in the blue states wanted to teach how to kill religious people, it would be okay? Or if enough people in your community wanted to teach white supremacy it would be okay?

I see you are an avid fan of the strawman argument.

Killing for obvious reasons is not an acceptable mandate from any community, state or region of our country because it is already against the law. The laws that govern the successful progression of any society requires a basic respect for and protection of the sanctity of innocent life...there is a balance between what we as individuals wish to pursue out of our own self interests and the needs of society at large...in the case of killing, in your case murder, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few...this is not an absolute rule, but rather a fine balance that varies from one society to the next based largely on its traditions and values.

If my community maintains overwhelming support towards white supremacy, I would remove myself from that community because it is not aligned with my values...however the laws of our country protect free speech such that even if I do not disagree with white supremacy, I respect the rights of those who believe such nonsense to congregate, discuss their values and attempt to recruit others to their cause...if our society allows the silencing of free speech, however dangerous that free speech may be, it sets a dangerous precedent for censorship.

Should we put stickers on Math textbooks saying "Parallel lines not intersecting is only an axiom. It is not t theorem, and and hasn't been proven

If that is the truth of the matter, then sure...although people rarely get as excited over mathematics as they do over matter of faith.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
I see you are an avid fan of the strawman argument.

Killing for obvious reasons is not an acceptable mandate from any community, state or region of our country because it is already against the law. The laws that govern the successful progression of any society requires a basic respect for and protection of the sanctity of innocent life...there is a balance between what we as individuals wish to pursue out of our own self interests and the needs of society at large...in the case of killing, in your case murder, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few...this is not an absolute rule, but rather a fine balance that varies from one society to the next based largely on its traditions and values.

If my community maintains overwhelming support towards white supremacy, I would remove myself from that community because it is not aligned with my values...however the laws of our country protect free speech such that even if I do not disagree with white supremacy, I respect the rights of those who believe such nonsense to congregate, discuss their values and attempt to recruit others to their cause...if our society allows the silencing of free speech, however dangerous that free speech may be, it sets a dangerous precedent for censorship.

That's not a stawman. It was two questions. I'm taking your arguments to their absurd conclusions. Basically you accept an outcome where white supremacy could be taught in American schools. You can't apply your lame community standard to religion but not to other things you don't agre with. Alternatively you do and you admit American communities can do whatever nefarious or idiotic things they want.

Killing isn't an acceptable mandate? What do you call capital punishment and war?