some are just lagging too far behind..... :wink:
(but then many insisted that the world was FLAT long after it was proven otherwise .......it's that old "resistance to change " factor..
what can one do?? :wink:
Evolution Debate ...
- Thread starter Planet_EN
- Start date
some are just lagging too far behind..... :wink:
(but then many insisted that the world was FLAT long after it was proven otherwise .......it's that old "resistance to change " factor..
what can one do?? :wink:
Ocean Breeze said:
Well OB, I am compelled by my nature to fight ignorance wherever I find it, including my own. That's what I do, and evidently so do a lot of other people, and that, I suppose, is why this thread is still alive.
There is another flaw in the Intelligent Design concept.
It's philosophically presumptuous to assume this universe
is all about us.
Yes, it is amazing that we live in a small dimensional
space that has just the right proportions, just the right
distance from the sun, just the right atmosphere, just
all the right ingredients, but technically this is a
reasoning called a syllogism.
It's philosophically presumptuous to assume this universe
is all about us.
Yes, it is amazing that we live in a small dimensional
space that has just the right proportions, just the right
distance from the sun, just the right atmosphere, just
all the right ingredients, but technically this is a
reasoning called a syllogism.
Pennsylvania joins the 19th century, bypassing Kansas and some parts of Alberta.
Story here.
Welcome home,Pennsylvania!!! :thumbup:
Story here.
Welcome home,Pennsylvania!!! :thumbup:
instead of starting another thread on this ........tucking this bulletin in here....
seeing as how Pasta beat me to it.......I guess it ain't really "breaking news " anymore. :wink:
Re: RE: Evolution Debate ...
Indeed. I'd have thought that, if it's unconstitutional in one state, it's unconstitutional in them all.
no1important said:
Indeed. I'd have thought that, if it's unconstitutional in one state, it's unconstitutional in them all.
I have a question. If creationists do get 'intelligent design' into biology classes which creation theory do they use? Or do they use some religious-neutral quasi-scientific creation theory. Which creationists are right since most of those religions contradict each other?
Ruling may create new interest in intelligent design movement
A teaser:
While some saw a federal ruling Tuesday as a major blow to the proponents of "intelligent design," a Seattle organization that is one of the movement's key figures slammed the decision as a futile attempt at government censorship that could actually further its message.
"We think (U.S. District Judge John Jones III) really overreached. He basically used this to step on a soapbox and pontificate about his views on intelligent design and even religion," said John West, a senior fellow at the Center for Science and Culture.
"If a judge ... thinks that getting a federal court ban in a particular school district is going to stop people from thinking about or researching intelligent design, I think he's living in a different world than I am."
Located inside the non-profit Discovery Institute in downtown Seattle, the Center for Science and Culture spends upward of $1 million a year on polls, advertising and research to challenge parts of Charles Darwin's evolutionary theory and to promote intelligent design, which holds that some features of the universe are too complex to be explained by natural selection. [/teaser]
All I can say is, What a bunch of nutjobs. :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:
A teaser:
While some saw a federal ruling Tuesday as a major blow to the proponents of "intelligent design," a Seattle organization that is one of the movement's key figures slammed the decision as a futile attempt at government censorship that could actually further its message.
"We think (U.S. District Judge John Jones III) really overreached. He basically used this to step on a soapbox and pontificate about his views on intelligent design and even religion," said John West, a senior fellow at the Center for Science and Culture.
"If a judge ... thinks that getting a federal court ban in a particular school district is going to stop people from thinking about or researching intelligent design, I think he's living in a different world than I am."
Located inside the non-profit Discovery Institute in downtown Seattle, the Center for Science and Culture spends upward of $1 million a year on polls, advertising and research to challenge parts of Charles Darwin's evolutionary theory and to promote intelligent design, which holds that some features of the universe are too complex to be explained by natural selection. [/teaser]
All I can say is, What a bunch of nutjobs. :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:
I think jesus was an alien..dont you?
Was the star the 3 wise men followed really a starship?
What was the imporatnce for them to witness jesus birth?
Was mary abducted,and then implanted with the divine being called jesus?
Why did the alleged jesus spend a good portion of his childhood in egypt? Was he learning ways to awaken his divine powers,such as walking on water..and reserecting the dead?
Was satan testing jesus powers in the wilderness?
Was jesus really speaking to moses in the moutain..and was the cloud god spoke from really an ufo?
As christanity spread thru out the world it sqaushed all most all true beliefs in the GODS'S....the belief in more then one god,or divine being certainly fits well with the concept of aliens,doesnt it!...why even did the earliestcivilizations report stories of more then one god? if there is supposedly only one? If they were the earliest known ppl around,why did all of them record history of more then one god,..and these gods interacted with humans,just like aliens do with us today!
Now all these stories are considered myths and the cover up of our true history,not what you learned in Sunday school....the teachings of jesus , had actually now become the main advantage of satan to keep us from knowing our true history.
Btw satan is an alien too,but an evil one,a liar and deciever,...he even has you tricked so well you dont even know he is an alien :wink:
Was the star the 3 wise men followed really a starship?
What was the imporatnce for them to witness jesus birth?
Was mary abducted,and then implanted with the divine being called jesus?
Why did the alleged jesus spend a good portion of his childhood in egypt? Was he learning ways to awaken his divine powers,such as walking on water..and reserecting the dead?
Was satan testing jesus powers in the wilderness?
Was jesus really speaking to moses in the moutain..and was the cloud god spoke from really an ufo?
As christanity spread thru out the world it sqaushed all most all true beliefs in the GODS'S....the belief in more then one god,or divine being certainly fits well with the concept of aliens,doesnt it!...why even did the earliestcivilizations report stories of more then one god? if there is supposedly only one? If they were the earliest known ppl around,why did all of them record history of more then one god,..and these gods interacted with humans,just like aliens do with us today!
Now all these stories are considered myths and the cover up of our true history,not what you learned in Sunday school....the teachings of jesus , had actually now become the main advantage of satan to keep us from knowing our true history.
Btw satan is an alien too,but an evil one,a liar and deciever,...he even has you tricked so well you dont even know he is an alien :wink:
There's a store front on Picadilly Street here
in Winchester Virginia that has a little outside speaker
broadcasting (not too loud or complaints would get
made) creationism.
Referring to the pictures displayed on its window,
the voice instructs us to consider all the gaps in
the evolutionary branch.
I haven't been to the Fellowship Bible Church for at
least half a year now. Laziness I guess. But I've always
pathetically liked the Sunday morning news programs
better.
And I just never made the effort to connect to a lot
of church goers. I know what it takes to network
with them and that might have been usedful, but
just chose to go my way.
I might like the sermon, picking
out what is useful to me and discarding the rest, but
understanding it, if not agreeing with it.
What I find useful out of the sermons, is some of
the thinking that focuses on helping others, and making
yourself a better person.
I watch both sides of this debate on creationism
and Darwin and understand what each side is saying.
This forum has had great threads on this subject.
I look at the whole matter as process, and watch
the very motivated fight their battles.
I've noticed that the most apartheid moment in
America is Sunday mornings.
Intelligent Design?
Well that stuff is a belief, a philosophy ---not a "theory" in the scientific meaning of the word as meaning testable, measurable, provable and its ability to predict
events that can be proven or disproven.
A lot of people down here really don't care,
figuring that both sides aren't really contradictory.
Mentioning creationism and Intelligent Design
in school is no great disaster for it might promote
interest in analyzing the issues, but now both
sides have this tyrannical hostility that any teacher
would be stupid to even come near the subject
if they want to keep their job.
Are we so afraid of this discussion in our schools?
I think we should teach students the difference
between a generic definition of theory
and the scientific definition of the word, theory.
I think teaching the very valid concept of
Darwinian evolution would benefit from discussing
why the creationists dislike it, and how their arguments
against it can be critiqued, but leaving some
validity to the fact that we really just don't know
how to prove or disprove in a scientific way the
existence of God, or even if God used evolution
as a method.
We're so afraid somebody might think wrong?
Where's our guts ?
in Winchester Virginia that has a little outside speaker
broadcasting (not too loud or complaints would get
made) creationism.
Referring to the pictures displayed on its window,
the voice instructs us to consider all the gaps in
the evolutionary branch.
I haven't been to the Fellowship Bible Church for at
least half a year now. Laziness I guess. But I've always
pathetically liked the Sunday morning news programs
better.
And I just never made the effort to connect to a lot
of church goers. I know what it takes to network
with them and that might have been usedful, but
just chose to go my way.
I might like the sermon, picking
out what is useful to me and discarding the rest, but
understanding it, if not agreeing with it.
What I find useful out of the sermons, is some of
the thinking that focuses on helping others, and making
yourself a better person.
I watch both sides of this debate on creationism
and Darwin and understand what each side is saying.
This forum has had great threads on this subject.
I look at the whole matter as process, and watch
the very motivated fight their battles.
I've noticed that the most apartheid moment in
America is Sunday mornings.
Intelligent Design?
Well that stuff is a belief, a philosophy ---not a "theory" in the scientific meaning of the word as meaning testable, measurable, provable and its ability to predict
events that can be proven or disproven.
A lot of people down here really don't care,
figuring that both sides aren't really contradictory.
Mentioning creationism and Intelligent Design
in school is no great disaster for it might promote
interest in analyzing the issues, but now both
sides have this tyrannical hostility that any teacher
would be stupid to even come near the subject
if they want to keep their job.
Are we so afraid of this discussion in our schools?
I think we should teach students the difference
between a generic definition of theory
and the scientific definition of the word, theory.
I think teaching the very valid concept of
Darwinian evolution would benefit from discussing
why the creationists dislike it, and how their arguments
against it can be critiqued, but leaving some
validity to the fact that we really just don't know
how to prove or disprove in a scientific way the
existence of God, or even if God used evolution
as a method.
We're so afraid somebody might think wrong?
Where's our guts ?
Re: RE: Evolution Debate ...
The issue is where, not whether, the discussion should take place. The ID folks want it in the science classroom, presented as a scientific theory with at least the same status as evolutionary theory. That's not the right place to talk about it. It has a certain philosophical, historical, cultural, political, and sociological interest, so the place to discuss it is in classes that deal with those kinds of subjects. It's not science and shouldn't be presented as such.
jimmoyer said:
The issue is where, not whether, the discussion should take place. The ID folks want it in the science classroom, presented as a scientific theory with at least the same status as evolutionary theory. That's not the right place to talk about it. It has a certain philosophical, historical, cultural, political, and sociological interest, so the place to discuss it is in classes that deal with those kinds of subjects. It's not science and shouldn't be presented as such.
Couple of comments:
I don't think "nutjobs is the word for them, No1:
That's only for polls and some advertising. It's tax-exempt, donated "Church money" too and these sleazebages pay themselves well, call themselves "scientists", and how much 'research" could there be, anyway? What a scam!
Call their spokesmen carny barkers, preachers (in the worst sense of the word), or performance artists. They have a sweet deal.
They've been sold to politicians who can appease a strong voting block without spending millions of tax dollars that have been earmarked for the pig-trough.
I don't think "nutjobs is the word for them, No1:
That's only for polls and some advertising. It's tax-exempt, donated "Church money" too and these sleazebages pay themselves well, call themselves "scientists", and how much 'research" could there be, anyway? What a scam!
Call their spokesmen carny barkers, preachers (in the worst sense of the word), or performance artists. They have a sweet deal.
They've been sold to politicians who can appease a strong voting block without spending millions of tax dollars that have been earmarked for the pig-trough.
I agree with you Dexter about science class.
There's plenty room for such discussion in
the social sciences, history, social studies.
I was just generally complaining how timid the
teachers must be to even discuss anything,
except strictly what is dictated by the school
administration curriculum.
And I guess the teacher's job is not policy, but
teaching what is allowed to teach.
There's plenty room for such discussion in
the social sciences, history, social studies.
I was just generally complaining how timid the
teachers must be to even discuss anything,
except strictly what is dictated by the school
administration curriculum.
And I guess the teacher's job is not policy, but
teaching what is allowed to teach.