Louisiana passes first antievolution "academic freedom" law

[Vic]

Originally posted by: KIRBYEE
What is there to support the existence of a creator, creationism or intelligent design?
Where is the creator and what exatcly is he?
Where's the evidence?

I have yet to see any evidence of a creator. Where's he gone hiding?

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

 

[KIRBYEE]

.

 

[ericlp]

Originally posted by: KIRBYEE

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: KIRBYEE
What is there to support the existence of a creator, creationism or intelligent design?
Where is the creator and what exatcly is he?
Where's the evidence?

I have yet to see any evidence of a creator. Where's he gone hiding?

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

I understand. But to me it just makes no sense to believe that there's a creator when there's no evidence of him. It makes even less sense when ID or creationism is taught in schools as a viable alternative to evolution without any supporting evidence. Creationists can't even agree on how old the Earth is.

The whole point of ID is teach religion in schools ... Period...

You have to go back to the court cases.

Judge Bars Intelligent Design
Associated Press Email 12.20.05

HARRISBURG, Pennsylvania -- "Intelligent design" cannot be mentioned in biology classes in a Pennsylvania public school district, a federal judge said Tuesday, ruling in one of the biggest courtroom clashes on evolution since the 1925 Scopes trial.

Dover Area School Board members violated the Constitution when they ordered that its biology curriculum must include the notion that life on Earth was produced by an unidentified, intelligent cause, U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III said.

Several members repeatedly lied to cover their motives even while professing religious beliefs, he said.

The school board policy, adopted in October 2004, was believed to have been the first of its kind in the nation.

"The citizens of the Dover area were poorly served by the members of the Board who voted for the ID Policy," Jones wrote.

The board's attorneys had said members were seeking to improve science education by exposing students to alternatives to Charles Darwin's theory of natural selection. Intelligent-design proponents argue that it cannot fully explain the existence of complex life forms.

The plaintiffs challenging the policy argued that intelligent design amounts to a secular repackaging of creationism, which the courts have already ruled cannot be taught in public schools.

The Dover policy required students to hear a statement about intelligent design before ninth-grade biology lessons on evolution. The statement said Charles Darwin's theory is "not a fact," has inexplicable "gaps," and refers students to an intelligent-design textbook, Of Pandas and People, for more information.

Jones said advocates of intelligent design "have bona fide and deeply held beliefs which drive their scholarly endeavors" and that he didn't believe the concept shouldn't be studied and discussed.

But, he wrote, "our conclusion today is that it is unconstitutional to teach ID as an alternative to evolution in a public school science classroom."

The controversy also divided the community and galvanized voters to oust eight incumbent school board members who supported the policy in the Nov. 8 school board election.

The case is among at least a handful that have focused new attention on the teaching of evolution in the nation's schools.

Earlier this month, a federal appeals court in Georgia heard arguments over whether evolution disclaimer stickers placed in a school system's biology textbooks were unconstitutional.

A federal judge in January ordered Cobb County school officials to immediately remove the stickers, which called evolution a theory, not a fact.

In November, state education officials in Kansas adopted new classroom science standards that call the theory of evolution into question.

Text of the statement on "intelligent design" that Dover Area High School administrators have been reading to students at the start of biology lessons on evolution:

"The Pennsylvania Academic Standards require students to learn about Darwin's theory of evolution and eventually to take a standardized test of which evolution is a part.

"Because Darwin's theory is a theory, it continues to be tested as new evidence is discovered. The theory is not a fact. Gaps in the theory exist for which there is no evidence. A theory is defined as a well-tested explanation that unifies a broad range of observations.

"Intelligent design is an explanation of the origin of life that differs from Darwin's view. The reference book, Of Pandas and People, is available in the library along with other resources for students who might be interested in gaining an understanding of what intelligent design actually involves.

"With respect to any theory, students are encouraged to keep an open mind. The school leaves the discussion of the origins of life to individual students and their families. As a standards-driven district, class instruction focuses upon preparing students to achieve proficiency on standards-based assessments."


Who is funding the BS? While it's the church, Why? Because the want to teach religion in our schools to recruit more paying members - Fact!

 

[sandorski]

Atomic Age--Compauter Age--Internet Age--Stupid Age, we've arrived!

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: KIRBYEE

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: KIRBYEE
What is there to support the existence of a creator, creationism or intelligent design?
Where is the creator and what exatcly is he?
Where's the evidence?

I have yet to see any evidence of a creator. Where's he gone hiding?

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

I understand. But to me it just makes no sense to believe that there's a creator when there's no evidence of him. It makes even less sense when ID or creationism is taught in schools as a viable alternative to evolution without any supporting evidence. Creationists can't even agree on how old the Earth is.

I am NOT advocating creationism or ID. Far from it, I am very much against those.

All I'm saying is that accepting evolution is not at all incompatible with having faith in God.

The Catholics don't teach creationism in the science classes of their many schools, for example. They teach evolution.

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: KIRBYEE

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: KIRBYEE
What is there to support the existence of a creator, creationism or intelligent design?
Where is the creator and what exatcly is he?
Where's the evidence?

I have yet to see any evidence of a creator. Where's he gone hiding?

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

I understand. But to me it just makes no sense to believe that there's a creator when there's no evidence of him. It makes even less sense when ID or creationism is taught in schools as a viable alternative to evolution without any supporting evidence. Creationists can't even agree on how old the Earth is.

I am NOT advocating creationism or ID. Far from it, I am very much against those.

All I'm saying is that accepting evolution is not at all incompatible with having faith in God.

The Catholics don't teach creationism in the science classes of their many schools, for example. They teach evolution.

What do you mean by faith in God?

It's impossible to believe in The Bible and evolution/science/etc...

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: KIRBYEE

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: KIRBYEE
What is there to support the existence of a creator, creationism or intelligent design?
Where is the creator and what exatcly is he?
Where's the evidence?

I have yet to see any evidence of a creator. Where's he gone hiding?

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

I understand. But to me it just makes no sense to believe that there's a creator when there's no evidence of him. It makes even less sense when ID or creationism is taught in schools as a viable alternative to evolution without any supporting evidence. Creationists can't even agree on how old the Earth is.

I am NOT advocating creationism or ID. Far from it, I am very much against those.

All I'm saying is that accepting evolution is not at all incompatible with having faith in God.

The Catholics don't teach creationism in the science classes of their many schools, for example. They teach evolution.

What do you mean by faith in God?

It's impossible to believe in The Bible and evolution/science/etc...

Most Christians don't view the Bible as "God".

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: KIRBYEE

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: KIRBYEE
What is there to support the existence of a creator, creationism or intelligent design?
Where is the creator and what exatcly is he?
Where's the evidence?

I have yet to see any evidence of a creator. Where's he gone hiding?

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

I understand. But to me it just makes no sense to believe that there's a creator when there's no evidence of him. It makes even less sense when ID or creationism is taught in schools as a viable alternative to evolution without any supporting evidence. Creationists can't even agree on how old the Earth is.

I am NOT advocating creationism or ID. Far from it, I am very much against those.

All I'm saying is that accepting evolution is not at all incompatible with having faith in God.

The Catholics don't teach creationism in the science classes of their many schools, for example. They teach evolution.

What do you mean by faith in God?

It's impossible to believe in The Bible and evolution/science/etc...

Speak for yourself. I do.

 

[Arkitech]

Originally posted by: Butterbean
I see no threat in this. Bad science is an epidemic at this time, and there are often political agendas behind it. The global warming stuff is flawed from beginning to end, but it still gets force fed with great hostitly for any disagreement. I have no issue with evolution as a principle but I see no reason to teach that human's are from apes since jillions of fossils are missing when they shouldn't be (democrats being from apes maybe). If people want to allow room for controversies about human origins I could not care less. The UK also passed laws to counter global warming rubbish ala Gore and more power to them. I feel like I am re-living the 1930's and rugenics with all the incredibly shoddy science going around (and psychologists/psychiatrists are some of the most guilty of al). There are weirdos on creation side and weirdos on the evolution side. It's not so bad they keep each other busy imo.

Schools must warn of Gore climate film bias
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...climate-film-bias.html

Although I don't know if agree with you on the global warming (I have'nt done much research in that area) but I do believe that there is a lot of shoddy science that takes place, but many people act as if it every scientific finding and report is infallible. In fact if you really think about it the way some people fanatically push evolution is similar to the fanatics you find in some religious circles. The same thing they detest about creationists is the same behavior that they exhibit.

 

[Arkitech]

Originally posted by: Vic
Let me just be the first to chime in this thread and say that evolution is a fact. While I'm not a biologist (prefer physics), I'd be happy to discuss details with those who disagree. I'd also like to find out just why you think this theory undermines your religious faith, when the larger consensus (outside of fundie churches and the south) is that science is discovering the glory of God. And I want to stress that last part for the religious faithful, as I grew up in a devout young earth creationist faith myself. However glorious you imagine God to be, absolutely pales in comparison to what science has discovered that God is. So what's the fight here? I dunno. I vaguely remember being taught to distrust science, but the logic didn't hold up. As science is not incompatible with God, just the authority structure of religions.

I've voiced a similar sentiment in previous threads and the problem I believe is that anyone who confesses to believe in God must be a moron in the eyes of the resident ATOT geniuses.

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: Arkitech

Originally posted by: Vic
Let me just be the first to chime in this thread and say that evolution is a fact. While I'm not a biologist (prefer physics), I'd be happy to discuss details with those who disagree. I'd also like to find out just why you think this theory undermines your religious faith, when the larger consensus (outside of fundie churches and the south) is that science is discovering the glory of God. And I want to stress that last part for the religious faithful, as I grew up in a devout young earth creationist faith myself. However glorious you imagine God to be, absolutely pales in comparison to what science has discovered that God is. So what's the fight here? I dunno. I vaguely remember being taught to distrust science, but the logic didn't hold up. As science is not incompatible with God, just the authority structure of religions.

I've voiced a similar sentiment in previous threads and the problem I believe is that anyone who confesses to believe in God must be a moron in the eyes of the resident ATOT geniuses.

That's just unfair though. The problem with many "ATOT geniuses" is that they see anybody who believes in God defined by the radicals that push ID v. Evolution. People don't realize there is a wide variety of faith and that most people of faith aren't idiots or don't operate with an agenda.

 

[Kerouactivist]

Originally posted by: BlinderBomber

Originally posted by: Arkitech

Originally posted by: Vic
Let me just be the first to chime in this thread and say that evolution is a fact. While I'm not a biologist (prefer physics), I'd be happy to discuss details with those who disagree. I'd also like to find out just why you think this theory undermines your religious faith, when the larger consensus (outside of fundie churches and the south) is that science is discovering the glory of God. And I want to stress that last part for the religious faithful, as I grew up in a devout young earth creationist faith myself. However glorious you imagine God to be, absolutely pales in comparison to what science has discovered that God is. So what's the fight here? I dunno. I vaguely remember being taught to distrust science, but the logic didn't hold up. As science is not incompatible with God, just the authority structure of religions.

I've voiced a similar sentiment in previous threads and the problem I believe is that anyone who confesses to believe in God must be a moron in the eyes of the resident ATOT geniuses.

On Talk radio the enemy is the "MSM" on here it's the "ATOT geniuses"...maybe the real enemy to you is reason and logic

 

[ericlp]

Originally posted by: Arkitech

Originally posted by: Butterbean
I see no threat in this. Bad science is an epidemic at this time, and there are often political agendas behind it. The global warming stuff is flawed from beginning to end, but it still gets force fed with great hostitly for any disagreement. I have no issue with evolution as a principle but I see no reason to teach that human's are from apes since jillions of fossils are missing when they shouldn't be (democrats being from apes maybe). If people want to allow room for controversies about human origins I could not care less. The UK also passed laws to counter global warming rubbish ala Gore and more power to them. I feel like I am re-living the 1930's and rugenics with all the incredibly shoddy science going around (and psychologists/psychiatrists are some of the most guilty of al). There are weirdos on creation side and weirdos on the evolution side. It's not so bad they keep each other busy imo.

Schools must warn of Gore climate film bias
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...climate-film-bias.html

Although I don't know if agree with you on the global warming (I have'nt done much research in that area) but I do believe that there is a lot of shoddy science that takes place, but many people act as if it every scientific finding and report is infallible. In fact if you really think about it the way some people fanatically push evolution is similar to the fanatics you find in some religious circles. The same thing they detest about creationists is the same behavior that they exhibit.

Show me a better "theory" and I'll believe it. ID is a joke...

Until then, I'll believe in Evolution and Darwin. Thank you very much.

 

[Excelsior]

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
It does not matter to me whether you or anyone else thinks its ridiculous. But to clarify, you could have two class rooms, one teaches evolution while the other Intelligent design. For that class parents would choose which their child would attend.

There are millions of people that believe God made man while there are also millions that say evolution from apes are what became man. It is unfair for one to lord over the other and say "this is not teachable because I don't believe its true".

EDIT: didn't read your entire post till after. I think whenever the normal time it is during class that evolution is taught, the parents should be notified to make a choice amongst which avenue they want their child schooled in.

Thankfully, it matters to the educators. The essence of your idea is that the children and their parents can dictate what their children will be taught by the public school system, even if what is being taught has no basis in science or academia. It is unfathomable.

Now, if you suggested that those children be home-schooled, I'd understand that. But you can't have groups of people forcing the public school system to replace science class with something like creationism.

That subject (creationism, or any other not based in fact, theory, or science period) should be kept to church schools, private religious schools, and home school.

 

[Zebo]

I say complete separation of church and state. I bet many of you arguing this is 'ok' would too after reading about foot baths being installed at University of Michigan. Sword cuts both ways and the predictable result is religious universes colliding on campus.

 

[jackschmittusa]

Arkitech

People don't "push" evolution. The principles of evolution are not founded on "shoddy science", but the work of thousands of trained scientists in myriad fields over a long period of time. Do we know everything about evolution? No. Will we ever? Maybe not. But this in no way invalidates the reality of the science behind it.

Neither creationism or ID is in any way science. They offer no evidence, no observable proof, cannot make predictions, nor do they offer any testable theory.

Evolution is as real as gravity. That's why people that understand what evolution is advocate that it be taught in science classes.

I reject creationism as it is based on ancient myths without any proof, or even the notion that proof is necessary. ID is the same thing in a new wrapper.

 

[KlokWyze]

Before children should be taught either or, they should be taught that most people tend to get carried away with ideas whether or not hey are "correct". It's quite obvious the issue here in this thread isn't even remotely related to evolutionary theory OR creationism.

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: Zebo
I say complete separation of church and state. I bet many of you arguing this is 'ok' would too after reading about foot baths being installed at University of Michigan. Sword cuts both ways and the predictable result is religious universes colliding on campus.

Wow.
Is it me, or do these religious rituals sound like the behavior of someone with a very severe case of OCD?
I can picture someone sitting on the floor, rocking forwards and back rapidly, muttering to himself in a quick, monotone voice: "Wash feet first, must face the proper direction. Seven times a day seven times seven times. Worship on Sundays. Don't eat shellfish. Can't eat shellfish. Pigs are bad too, definitely bad pigs. Must grow long hair over your ears, but nowhere else. Have to wear a little hat too, always a hat."
And so on.

 

[jackschmittusa]

KlokWyze

It's quite obvious the issue here in this thread isn't even remotely related to evolutionary theory OR creationism.

What issue? The OP?

If you are referring to the OP, then yes, it is.

If not, then what do you perceive is the issue?

And what about "most people tend to get carried away with ideas whether or not hey are "correct"?

Do you consider evolution to be just an idea?

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: KIRBYEE

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: KIRBYEE
What is there to support the existence of a creator, creationism or intelligent design?
Where is the creator and what exatcly is he?
Where's the evidence?

I have yet to see any evidence of a creator. Where's he gone hiding?

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

I understand. But to me it just makes no sense to believe that there's a creator when there's no evidence of him. It makes even less sense when ID or creationism is taught in schools as a viable alternative to evolution without any supporting evidence. Creationists can't even agree on how old the Earth is.

I am NOT advocating creationism or ID. Far from it, I am very much against those.

All I'm saying is that accepting evolution is not at all incompatible with having faith in God.

The Catholics don't teach creationism in the science classes of their many schools, for example. They teach evolution.

Can anything be incompatible with a made up and always changing view of God?

 

[Arkitech]

Originally posted by: jackschmittusa
Arkitech

People don't "push" evolution. The principles of evolution are not founded on "shoddy science", but the work of thousands of trained scientists in myriad fields over a long period of time. Do we know everything about evolution? No. Will we ever? Maybe not. But this in no way invalidates the reality of the science behind it.


I'm not claiming evolution is founded on shoddy work, however there has been many incidents of shoddy or fraudulent work in the field of science and some of it was within the realm of evolution. And that's not to say that I (and other people who believe in God) don't see the logic in evolution, it's just that many of us don't believe that it explains the origin of life.


Neither creationism or ID is in any way science. They offer no evidence, no observable proof, cannot make predictions, nor do they offer any testable theory.

Evolution is as real as gravity. That's why people that understand what evolution is advocate that it be taught in science classes.

I reject creationism as it is based on ancient myths without any proof, or even the notion that proof is necessary. ID is the same thing in a new wrapper.



This is a major problem with people who make a surface evaluation of somone's beliefs. You're basically looking at all religion with a obvious disdain for the very notion of it's existence and you don' take the time to examine what it is that you're dismissing. Critics have been trying to disprove the bible for years, but many in their attempts to do so have inadvertently discovered that what they thought to be a hoax was something much more substantial.

 

[smack Down]

I'm not claiming evolution is founded on shoddy work, however there has been many incidents of shoddy or fraudulent work in the field of science and some of it was within the realm of evolution. And that's not to say that I (and other people who believe in God) don't see the logic in evolution, it's just that many of us don't believe that it explains the origin of life.

Thank you captain obvious it is clear that you are a great studier of the theory of evolution. Evolution means to change not to create. Of course it doesn't explain the origins of life it doesn't even try to.

This is a major problem with people who make a surface evaluation of somone's beliefs. You're basically looking at all religion with a obvious disdain for the very notion of it's existence and you don' take the time to examine what it is that you're dismissing. Critics have been trying to disprove the bible for years, but many in their attempts to do so have inadvertently discovered that what they thought to be a hoax was something much more substantial.

Yeah welcome to the world of science. Where belief in a theory just gets you laughed at if you don't have the evidence to back it up. Don't like it then to bad
.

 

[Arkitech]

Originally posted by: smack Down

I'm not claiming evolution is founded on shoddy work, however there has been many incidents of shoddy or fraudulent work in the field of science and some of it was within the realm of evolution. And that's not to say that I (and other people who believe in God) don't see the logic in evolution, it's just that many of us don't believe that it explains the origin of life.

Thank you captain obvious it is clear that you are a great studier of the theory of evolution. Evolution means to change not to create. Of course it doesn't explain the origins of life it doesn't even try to.

Have you read some of evolution threads on this site? Seems like every other person I talk with believes this.

This is a major problem with people who make a surface evaluation of somone's beliefs. You're basically looking at all religion with a obvious disdain for the very notion of it's existence and you don' take the time to examine what it is that you're dismissing. Critics have been trying to disprove the bible for years, but many in their attempts to do so have inadvertently discovered that what they thought to be a hoax was something much more substantial.

Yeah welcome to the world of science. Where belief in a theory just gets you laughed at if you don't have the evidence to back it up. Don't like it then to bad
.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: Arkitech

Originally posted by: smack Down

I'm not claiming evolution is founded on shoddy work, however there has been many incidents of shoddy or fraudulent work in the field of science and some of it was within the realm of evolution. And that's not to say that I (and other people who believe in God) don't see the logic in evolution, it's just that many of us don't believe that it explains the origin of life.

Thank you captain obvious it is clear that you are a great studier of the theory of evolution. Evolution means to change not to create. Of course it doesn't explain the origins of life it doesn't even try to.

Have you read some of evolution threads on this site? Seems like every other person I talk with believes this.

Sorry, I get my science information from text books and professors. You might want to try the same instead of the bible and random people on the internet.

 

[jackschmittusa]

Arkitech

I can't think of a single person I know that thinks evolution deals with "the origin of life". And speaking of the threads on the forum, I've seen that "evolution = origin of life" smacked down every time it's brought up. And the only people that bring it up are those who reject evolution.