Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 316

Thread: Creationism in School?

  1. #51
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Posts
    13,692
    Mentioned
    146 Post(s)
    Quoted
    130 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by doublex8 View Post
    What if some people would rather believe that their God created the Universe? Who cares?
    I'm fine with people believing it, not with them preaching and teaching it.


    Quote Originally Posted by doublex8 View Post
    I know Atheists do not believe in an omnipotent being...I wasn't saying they did either. I know what an Atheist is. And that might not fit in the picture of atheism but I wasn't saying it would either.



    I have never felt that any scientists that claims to believe in God or is a Christian has ever sought out to scientifically explain God or find 100% proof. If one has(which I am sure one has) he is either probably not a good scientist or Christian for that matter. Christianity is a faith, meaning one can't prove it's true. One believes it is true. Just because one believes it is true doesn't mean they feel that it needs to be sent to the lab in order to prove to the world that this is how it is. It means they feel it is the truth and don't mind telling other people what they believe. Any Christian trying to shove it down your throat is imo not a Christian. That being said I think it would be very easy to keep faith separated from scientific findings if you are a scientist. There is nothing in the Bible that specifically describes the exact way God made the universe, and the time that God took to create the universe is open to interpretation(i.e. 7 days for God might not be 7 days for man). There really isn't anything that I have read in the Bible that scientifically lays out how things were done, it just says that they were done. I don't see why there are so many Christians that feel they need to defend the Bible against evolution when I personally don't feel that there is anything in evolution that disproves anything in the Bible. I do believe in evolution. I also believe that there was a little bit of help in pushing all this into existence, and then whatever happened after that happened(i.e. evolution). Believing in intelligent design does not mean I am religious.
    Intelligent Design is quite religious and perpendicular to Evolution. So if Evolution is proven on scientific grounds - which we all agree on I am sure - ID is completely invalid on scientific grounds.



    The best way to contact me is by email, which you can find on my website: http://wizzup.org
    I also get email notifications of private messages, though.

    Simba (on Twitter | Group on Villavu | Website | Stable/Unstable releases
    Documentation | Source | Simba Bug Tracker on Github and Villavu )


    My (Blog | Website)

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Northern Kentuckeh
    Posts
    759
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    1 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wizzup? View Post
    Intelligent Design is quite religious and perpendicular to Evolution. So if Evolution is proven on scientific grounds - which we all agree on I am sure - ID is completely invalid on scientific grounds.
    There seems to be some specific part of evolution that trumps any chance that someone who believes in ID could say "maybe that is the way said God planned it out to be". What is it exactly that trumps ID? I've always found that when talking to someone who is an atheist about such matters, the only differences we have is that he feels that this is all random chance, I feel there was something that made that random chance happen. Other than that, we seem to agree on everything else.
    Quote Originally Posted by h_king1998 View Post
    how come it does not bank in al-kharid when i do mine 1 drop 1

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Posts
    13,692
    Mentioned
    146 Post(s)
    Quoted
    130 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by doublex8 View Post
    There seems to be some specific part of evolution that trumps any chance that someone who believes in ID could say "maybe that is the way said God planned it out to be". What is it exactly that trumps ID? I've always found that when talking to someone who is an atheist about such matters, the only differences we have is that he feels that this is all random chance, I feel there was something that made that random chance happen. Other than that, we seem to agree on everything else.
    ID is perpendicular to Evolution, see the wikipedia article on it.



    The best way to contact me is by email, which you can find on my website: http://wizzup.org
    I also get email notifications of private messages, though.

    Simba (on Twitter | Group on Villavu | Website | Stable/Unstable releases
    Documentation | Source | Simba Bug Tracker on Github and Villavu )


    My (Blog | Website)

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    R_GetPlayerLoc;
    Posts
    2,235
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    14 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wizzup? View Post
    ID is perpendicular to Evolution, see the wikipedia article on it.
    To an extent but ID != Atheism cause there's a "designer" from what I have heard/read.

    There are some who believe that evolution and religion go hand in hand though.
    "Logic never changes, just the syntax" - Kyle Undefined?

    Remember, The Edit Button Is There For A Reason!!!

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Hawaii
    Posts
    3,880
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Quoted
    152 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yago View Post
    To an extent but ID != Atheism cause there's a "designer" from what I have heard/read.

    There are some who believe that evolution and religion go hand in hand though.
    In Islam we don't deny evolution. I don't think a lot of religions deny evolution... The only difference is we believe god created everything, and you atheists believe everything happened by chance.

    So I don't see why creationism should not to be taught in school.
    Faith is an oasis in the heart which will never be reached by the caravan of thinking.

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Posts
    13,692
    Mentioned
    146 Post(s)
    Quoted
    130 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kingarabian View Post
    So I don't see why creationism should not to be taught in school.
    Like I said, as a lesson in critical thinking.



    The best way to contact me is by email, which you can find on my website: http://wizzup.org
    I also get email notifications of private messages, though.

    Simba (on Twitter | Group on Villavu | Website | Stable/Unstable releases
    Documentation | Source | Simba Bug Tracker on Github and Villavu )


    My (Blog | Website)

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    3,352
    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Quoted
    437 Post(s)

    Default

    Here is my opinion

    We were created, crafted, molded to be the perfect beings we are today... Well almost.

    Evolution makes a lot of sense, agreed?
    Then here we have creation "God" Created us and every creature in the world.

    Now here is how I think the two merge into one
    In the bible sorry for those of you who already tuned out, it says God created everything in 6 days (7th was rest).

    1) Day 1 light
    2) Split between Water/Land
    3) Grasses and trees were created
    4) sun; moon and stars
    5) fish, land creatures and fowl;
    6) man, both male and female.

    Now my opinion begins, who is to say God's 6 days of creation are "24 hours" but instead could be millenniums.

    Day 1 light, we all agree light = life?
    Day 2 we have bacteria in the water, when it splits we have bacteria on land!
    Day 3 we have food (Plants) Food = growth
    Day 4 we have Heat/cold/night (Variation)
    Day 5 we have the bacteria evolving into creatures. The ones that were superior made it onto land and started to evolve differently (This explains the loss of gills on snakes etc..)
    Day 6 The superior creatures on land slowly turned into us
    Maybe with a little push from the all mighty hand

    Sorry if that made no sense in my head it sounded better.




    Anti-Leech Movement Prevent Leeching Spread the word
    Insanity 60 Days (Killer workout)
    XoL Blog (Workouts/RS/Misc)

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Hawaii
    Posts
    3,880
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Quoted
    152 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wizzup? View Post
    Like I said, as a lesson in critical thinking.
    Just a lesson? Maybe 3 chapters:
    1. Creationism
    2. Evolution
    3. Creationism vs Evolution
    Faith is an oasis in the heart which will never be reached by the caravan of thinking.

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    795
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    6 Post(s)

    Default

    Evolution in school ?



    Dont Steal..

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Posts
    13,692
    Mentioned
    146 Post(s)
    Quoted
    130 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SubiN View Post
    Evolution in school ?
    Madness! The system must be evolving.



    The best way to contact me is by email, which you can find on my website: http://wizzup.org
    I also get email notifications of private messages, though.

    Simba (on Twitter | Group on Villavu | Website | Stable/Unstable releases
    Documentation | Source | Simba Bug Tracker on Github and Villavu )


    My (Blog | Website)

  11. #61
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Wednesday
    Posts
    2,446
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Quoted
    1 Post(s)

    Default

    Before engaging in the evolution side-debate, I want to clarify something: teaching someone about Creationism does not make them less ignorant. It takes a few seconds to inform someone: "Creationism is the belief that a higher power of some unfathomable kind made life as we know it." Once that is done, it reveals nothing new about the world or how the world works. It sheds no light on something that before was beyond imagination or explains why something is or does. Creationism is very much the end rather than the beginning. To say that a cow has four legs because God made it so tells us nothing about why the cow has four legs. For that reason, Creationism has no place in a school. There are other reasons that have already been mentioned that I agree with and some I don't, but I don't feel like they need to be addressed again.

    With that done, onto evolution. First of all, I want to criticise the various mentions of "random chance" because that's very much not what evolution is. Let us separate evolution from natural selection. Evolution is focused on the changing of species into new species. Natural selection is the dynamic filtering of the gene pool where some chance is involved, but there is also bias, with genes that best build survival machines (ie animals) being more likely to survive and continue their existence in the pool.

    Evolution is something that has been observed via selective breeding. There is no way to doubt that evolution can occur because selective breeding can produce animals that differ greatly from their ancestors in a small amount of generations. Natural selection is harder to directly observe, because it works on a longer time frame since it doesn't have an intelligence to decide what factors make good survival machines. So, if evidence is wanted, one must look at species that are similar yet in different environments and check if the differences between them match the differences in environment, such as Darwin's finches. I'll leave it at that without going onto the other evidence supporting as that's easily found at Wikipedia.

    To address Tara's earlier point regarding the non-mutation of bacteria to a more advanced form of life, I feel like I can offer only layman possibilities as I'm not formerly educated in the area. The first suggestion is that bacteria bred by humans is in infinitely different conditions to those that gave rise to the complex ancestors. The second is that time frames for life before bones or hard substances in general is unknown and hard to estimate simply due to the lack of fossils or similar to date it, thus it is unknown how long ancestral bacteria had at their disposal to produce complexity - even saying this though, we have been growing bacteria for but a thousand years at a very generous estimate, while ancestral bacteria could easily have many millennia and the entire world as their Petri-dish. The third is that it may have been the case that a large supply of raw materials led to vast diversity and that diversity let different strains form mutually beneficial partnerships of sorts that eventually coalesced into a "single" life form that paved the way for more complex life. I could go on, but I feel like I'm already walking on thin academic ice.

    Intelligent design is a very real possibility, but not for explaining life on earth. As Tara hinted at, gene splicing is possible and that can/will/may allow new life forms to be made to a specification. It may not be on the level of creating miniature cows that makes chocolate milk, but it fits the bill for a life form being produced by a conscious mind with a specific purpose or purposes.
    By reading this signature you agree that mixster is superior to you in each and every way except the bad ways but including the really bad ways.

  12. #62
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    3,051
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    What is the meaning of life?

    Is there an experiment that can answer that question scientifically? No. Is there any possible way to approach such a question? Yes.

    Philosophy and religion try to answer such questions that are beyond the scope of science. If you get a PhD in physics AND a PhD in Philosophy are you automatically a bad Philosopher because you have a larger scientific understanding? If you get a PhD in Chemistry AND a PhD in Theology are you automatically a bad Scientist because you have a larger Theological understanding? Ridiculous.

    Science is a methodological approach that can be used to understand a limited sphere of existence. It should not be used as a cage to trap humanity in that limited sphere of understanding. There is a huge amount of truth to be found in other approaches as well which should not be arbitrarily dismissed.

    The science of Abiogenesis (the scientific alternative to Creationism), is not rigorous science. It's a mix of philosophy, chemistry, and wishful thinking.

    That's why I said "Origins" really doesn't belong in high school classes. Neither alternative has a solid scientific foundation. Are we teaching science, or are we teaching a secular philosophy course? Some schools in America asked that along with the Abiogenesis lectures, they merely include more information about the flaws and other unscientific parts. They just wanted a fuller, more complete discussion of the pros and cons of the ideas. That also led to lawsuits by those that want to parade it as fact.

    The whole Piltdown Man hoax shows that there are people out there who fervently want to push a secular evolutionary philosophy onto society and are willing to fabricate "evidence" to do it.


  13. #63
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    NC, USA.
    Posts
    4,429
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    4 Post(s)

    Default

    Aliens.
    Quote Originally Posted by irc
    [00:55:29] < Guest3097> I lol at how BenLand100 has become noidea
    [01:07:40] <@BenLand100> i'm not noidea i'm
    [01:07:44] -!- BenLand100 is now known as BenLand42-
    [01:07:46] <@BenLand42-> shit
    [01:07:49] -!- BenLand42- is now known as BenLand420
    [01:07:50] <@BenLand420> YEA

  14. #64
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Hawaii
    Posts
    3,880
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Quoted
    152 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by matviy View Post
    Then you didn't pay attention. There is nothing, zero, zip, nada, zilch that is "scientific" about creationism. You either do not understand evolution, or you do not properly understand creationism.

    Creationism isn't a science. It's a blind belief. As soon as you apply even the remotest amount of rational thought (science) to the problem, creationism falls apart. You're trying hard to paint a picture as if creationism has a case to present that should be considered. It doesn't. It has absolutely nothing. It ignores everything.
    Okay, can your science explain to me what caused the big bang?
    __
    Thank you guys all for your comments. I may be using some of your posts as ideas for my paper. If you have a problem and don't want me to use your stuff PLEASE PM ME ASAP.
    Last edited by kingarabian; 11-25-2011 at 10:11 AM.
    Faith is an oasis in the heart which will never be reached by the caravan of thinking.

  15. #65
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    General Discussion/Debate (:
    Posts
    9
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Well... This is a very touchy debate, i personally wouldn't prefer it, however i don't think it should be completely eliminated, it should be optional... although, i do FIRMLY believe religion of any kind has NO place in the public education system, if you're going to a religious school ok, but from my experience, religion allowed in school is bad i almost failed a class back in like 5th grade, because i stated i didn't believe in god. >_>

    tl;dr
    Make it optional, or don't have it at all.

  16. #66
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Posts
    13,692
    Mentioned
    146 Post(s)
    Quoted
    130 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kingarabian View Post
    Okay, can your science explain to me what caused the big bang?
    __
    Thank you guys all for your comments. I may be using some of your posts as ideas for my paper. If you have a problem and don't want me to use your stuff PLEASE PM ME ASAP.
    I'd rather just like to know what stuff you are using, so we know how we helped you.



    The best way to contact me is by email, which you can find on my website: http://wizzup.org
    I also get email notifications of private messages, though.

    Simba (on Twitter | Group on Villavu | Website | Stable/Unstable releases
    Documentation | Source | Simba Bug Tracker on Github and Villavu )


    My (Blog | Website)

  17. #67
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Hawaii
    Posts
    3,880
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Quoted
    152 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wizzup? View Post
    I'd rather just like to know what stuff you are using, so we know how we helped you.
    - I compared the Pros and Cons about creationism in school by using everyone's opinions that you all posted.
    - I used your quotes and I also went on to say how creationism should be taught and used in school (critical thinking)
    - I read a lot of Tara's posts and got some ideas on why Creationism should be a legit part of a students curriculum if a student chooses to learn about Creationism.

    Basically used everyone's posts as ideas for my paper, like here and there I could find something to build on. Then I incorporated some research of mine and expanded it. It's 7 pages long so I was in desperate need.
    Faith is an oasis in the heart which will never be reached by the caravan of thinking.

  18. #68
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    14
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    There was just a programme on this on more4, I didn't watch personally but just pointing it out for people who are interested.(i'm british, so this probably won't apply to you all)

  19. #69
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    111
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    1 Post(s)

    Default

    I'm a Catholic, but I don't think that school should teach creationism without giving a choice to kids/people. Evolution isn't a great concept either tbh...

    Hmm.. I really don't know. I think that neither creationism nor evolution should be taught in schools as a base class; both should be elective classes and neither should be considered "true".

  20. #70
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,227
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Quoted
    60 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dweg View Post
    I'm a Catholic, but I don't think that school should teach creationism without giving a choice to kids/people. Evolution isn't a great concept either tbh...

    Hmm.. I really don't know. I think that neither creationism nor evolution should be taught in schools as a base class; both should be elective classes and neither should be considered "true".
    Relativity and gravity are still theories, so should they only be taught in elective classes and not be considered "true?"

    I think teaching different theories is perfectly acceptable. The one thing that I love about most non-religious theories about the world is that they always have some degree of "I don't know." To a lot of people that may seem like a fault, but to me it's quite humble and makes it much more credible. Which is just another reason why I think teaching religion can be bad because it doesn't have that sense of doubt. It's (most) always "this is how it is because it is, and we know it is because God." That's horribly foolish in my mind. We can't really know a lot of things.

    Anyway, good luck with your paper, king.

  21. #71
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    7,805
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Quoted
    3 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kingarabian View Post
    Okay, can your science explain to me what caused the big bang?
    __
    Thank you guys all for your comments. I may be using some of your posts as ideas for my paper. If you have a problem and don't want me to use your stuff PLEASE PM ME ASAP.
    Just cite people.

    But know, we are not experts here..

    I also had no comment here, just commenting on the comment on the comment.

    Comment-ception.
    Writing an SRL Member Application | [Updated] Pascal Scripting Statements
    My GitHub

    Progress Report:
    13:46 <@BenLand100> <SourceCode> @BenLand100: what you have just said shows you 
                        have serious physchological problems
    13:46 <@BenLand100> HE GETS IT!
    13:46 <@BenLand100> HE FINALLY GETS IT!!!!1

  22. #72
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Hawaii
    Posts
    3,880
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Quoted
    152 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nava2 View Post
    Just cite people.

    But know, we are not experts here..

    I also had no comment here, just commenting on the comment on the comment.

    Comment-ception.
    Well I definitely would... but my professor won't see you guys as credible sources.
    Faith is an oasis in the heart which will never be reached by the caravan of thinking.

  23. #73
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    West Coast
    Posts
    67
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by doublex8 View Post
    Someone is butthurt. I certainly never said I was religious...in fact I'm pretty sure I specifically said I wasn't. I really didn't even think this was that touchy of a subject anymore. I guess some people have had really bad experience with religious types. Most Christians I meet are actually very nice and easy going people. I speaking of Non Denomination of course, I do think there are many faults in the Catholic Church. But really why get so mad about something that you claim is without a doubt 100% correct over something that you believe has no validity whatsoever? What if some people would rather believe that their God created the Universe? Who cares?
    I'm not mad, but the more i think about it the more i realize that i probably should be.

    I would love for this topic to be something that people can just "agree to disagree" on. But they can't. I have no problem with religious people just like i don't have a problem with schizophrenics, as long as their beliefs don't start affecting their actions. Unfortunately they do.

    I have a problem when people with these delusions influence government policy. I have a problem when they try to squirm into schools and teach kids. I have a problem when they start actively resisting medical research and the overall intelligent progress of our society. And they do.

    It annoys me when these kinds of debates emerge because they are based on the assumption that religious beliefs such as creationism have even a shred of credibility and are actually worth arguing over.

    It's the equivalent of my creating a thread where i declare that i have developed a new mathematical theory where 1+1=7, and that i have empirical proof to back it up. Then when people ask me for my proof i present nothing more than a mess of flawed mathematical concepts, contradictions, and backwards logic. I then use my audiences dumbfounded silence or inability to refute all my bullshit in it's entirety as even further evidence of my genius, before i go off to rewrite all of science, threaten anyone who opposes me with violence, replace libraries with my own books, halt medical research if it isn't based on my theories, and force your children in school to spend an hour a day studying the ridiculous crap i came up with before making another thread here asking people why they're so mad and whey they even care what i believe in.

  24. #74
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    R_GetPlayerLoc;
    Posts
    2,235
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    14 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by matviy View Post
    long quote
    I know some atheistic/agnosticists who act in this same manner...

    1+1 != 7...

    MacroEvolution =? True... (Theory)

    Lets teach our kids theories instead of what is not true... Problem solved

    Oh wait... Creationism hasn't been proven either... hmm...
    "Logic never changes, just the syntax" - Kyle Undefined?

    Remember, The Edit Button Is There For A Reason!!!

  25. #75
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    West Coast
    Posts
    67
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yago View Post
    I know some atheistic/agnosticists who act in this same manner...

    1+1 != 7...

    MacroEvolution =? True... (Theory)

    Lets teach our kids theories instead of what is not true... Problem solved

    Oh wait... Creationism hasn't been proven either... hmm...
    Except that Macro Evolution isn't just a "theory" that somebody came up with yesterday. It's wrong to group all theories together and claim that they should all be equally considered just because they haven't been proven. Instead you examine the evidence supporting each theory to consider which are most likely to be true.

    The validity of macro evolution isn't debated by any scientists who know anything about biology. There is an endless amount of evidence supporting it, and more evidence appearing every day. Experiments can be made and their results accurately predicted. It not only stands the test of time, but we are more sure of it now than we have ever been before.

    Creationism on the other hand, also a "theory", has a grand total of no evidence supporting it. A good amount of claims made creationism has been proven wrong and impossible, which supporters dismiss as "misinterpretation of what god meant". People who support it have a bias due to it being an integral part of their overall world view and belief system. Creationism doesn't have a case, not even remotely.

Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •