20 Jul 08
Originally posted by scherzoFar from broken I'm afraid. The US is a Theocracy, and now Kansas is passing laws to allow creationist dogma to be taught in science classes.
Maybe the Creationist Christians should've listened in high school science when they had the chance. It's almost sad ... for all that I hate their ideas and their ignorance and their dogma, they're now broken and have nowhere else to go.
They have a new trick now, forgoing the words ID or Creationism, now it's 'Academic Freedom'. Insidious attack on human dignity is what it is.
20 Jul 08
Originally posted by sonhouseSo in America it is possible to teach non-Sience in Sience classes?
Far from broken I'm afraid. The US is a Theocracy, and now Kansas is passing laws to allow creationist dogma to be taught in science classes.
They have a new trick now, forgoing the words ID or Creationism, now it's 'Academic Freedom'. Insidious attack on human dignity is what it is.
Is it possible to teach any lie, just by calling it Science?
20 Jul 08
Originally posted by FabianFnasPart of the problem in the US is that the standards are locally controlled - so there isn't much of a national curriculum.
So in America it is possible to teach non-Sience in Sience classes?
Is it possible to teach any lie, just by calling it Science?
They tried passing creationism/ID off as science and failed. Now they are passing laws that say that teachers have the freedom to teach opposing theories, which they had already. They just want to find ways to allow teachers to teach the "holes" in evolution as being significant enough to discredit it now.
21 Jul 08
Originally posted by sonhouseYep, anything that disagrees with your point of view is that bad!
Far from broken I'm afraid. The US is a Theocracy, and now Kansas is passing laws to allow creationist dogma to be taught in science classes.
They have a new trick now, forgoing the words ID or Creationism, now it's 'Academic Freedom'. Insidious attack on human dignity is what it is.
Kelly
21 Jul 08
1 edit
Originally posted by KellyJayWhat about the idea of separation of church and state? It looks to me a whole lot like the state pushing religious dogma onto a science course. How can you even suggest it to be worthy of comparison to science? It belongs in a religious study group. What exactly is wrong with doing religion in a religion class and doing science in a science class? I'll tell you what's wrong from the ID'ers perspective:
Yep, anything that disagrees with your point of view is that bad!
Kelly
They cannot stand the idea that something is fundamentally wrong with their biblical account of the universe and will use every dirty trick in the book to force their viewpoint onto impressionable young minds where they hope to generate yet another generation of duped kids.
ANYTHING to destroy evolution, that is and always will be the ultimate goal. The science dudes have no problem with ID'ers making scientific arguments but don't go off in a huff if there are holes in the paper, they will be pointed out and not just because it's from an ID'er but because that is the scientists JOB, to discredit bad science. Just remember, scientists don't go around ad hoc denying ID, they DO go around destroying halfasss logic and poor science. THAT IS WHAT THEY DO, and they will do it against any poor science, not just ID.
Poor science is done all the time. Look at Cold Fusion or Bubble Fusion. Both were examined pretty closely and found wanting. They didn't hold conferences with ad hominum attacks on Pons and his pals, they just duplicated the work and found no excess heat and said so. If Pons and his buddies have something better coming up and more provable, those scientists will welcome the news with open arms.
It's not like ID, who ONLY welcome good news supporting ID. Any other outcome is scoffed at, CONSPIRACY is what they screech.
21 Jul 08
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonIf god could create the earth/universe in 6 days, he could surely create light with the image of the other galaxies already on its way.
If I remember correctly, creationists don’t only believe that the Earth is 6000 years old but they also believe that the whole universe is 6000 years old?
The speed of light has been scientifically measured precisely. It has been calculated that, given the speed of light, light from other galaxies takes millions of years to reach us. For example, ...[text shortened]... lain this evidence that contradicts their belief that the whole universe is only 6000 years old?
Divine intervention vs science: incompatible...
21 Jul 08
Originally posted by forkedknightSounds more like satan's power to keep us from science...
If god could create the earth/universe in 6 days, he could surely create light with the image of the other galaxies already on its way.
Divine intervention vs science: incompatible...
Why is satan so afraid of the fact that evolution is true?
21 Jul 08
Originally posted by forkedknightOk, lets look at that possibility:
If god could create the earth/universe in 6 days, he could surely create light with the image of the other galaxies already on its way.
Divine intervention vs science: incompatible...
If that is true we must be the only other intelligence in the entire (what to us is) the universe. So god could then set things up specifically to fool us into believing the universe to be 14 odd bil year old when it really is 6K.
Ok, so this god arranged all the light in the universe to converge on the solar system, no, just Earth, all at the right times, no slip up's allowed.
Why I think that's a reasonable thing for a god to do. Completely fooled us! So we wait for some unknown time in what we think of as the future for this god to jump out of a doorway and say 'APRIL FOOLS!"
So what about the possibility there are other civilizations out there as advanced or more advanced than us?
How would this alleged god fix it so all those civilizations think the universe is also 14 billion years old when it's really only 6K?
This god would have multiple centers of light converging on each and every civilization convincing each and every one the really 6,000 year old universe is really 14 billion years old.
Why, of course. I see it now, Yea though I walk in the valley of darkness my journey into the light is complete now.
21 Jul 08
Originally posted by sonhouseDogma, please define that word for me so I do not accuse you of
What about the idea of separation of church and state? It looks to me a whole lot like the state pushing religious dogma onto a science course. How can you even suggest it to be worthy of comparison to science? It belongs in a religious study group. What exactly is wrong with doing religion in a religion class and doing science in a science class? I'll tell ...[text shortened]... news supporting ID. Any other outcome is scoffed at, CONSPIRACY is what they screech.
something you do not mean to say. If people in science start to move
into area of faith you will see comparisons, it is bound to happen.
The issue I have with you is that you on one hand you allow things to
occur in people of science that you scream about whenn people of faith
do the same exact thing.
Kelly
21 Jul 08
Originally posted by sonhouse"So god could then set things up specifically to fool us into believing the universe to be 14 odd bil year old when it really is 6K."
Ok, lets look at that possibility:
If that is true we must be the only other intelligence in the entire (what to us is) the universe. So god could then set things up specifically to fool us into believing the universe to be 14 odd bil year old when it really is 6K.
Ok, so this god arranged all the light in the universe to converge on the solar system, no, ...[text shortened]... now, Yea though I walk in the valley of darkness my journey into the light is complete now.
Actually, the Word of God tells you how it was all put together, you
reject that and come up with your own version; it isn't God that is
doing any fooling here.
Kelly
21 Jul 08
Originally posted by KellyJayWhere in the word of god does it say that he put the light in transit as mentioned? Where does it mention that he put fossils in the ground that makes it look like they've been there for millions of years and that life has gradually changed?
"So god could then set things up specifically to fool us into believing the universe to be 14 odd bil year old when it really is 6K."
Actually, the Word of God tells you how it was all put together, you
reject that and come up with your own version; it isn't God that is
doing any fooling here.
Kelly
Scientists didn't just come up with our own version, they looked at the evidence and worked out what the evidence actually shows.
The facts are that the world does not look like it was created 6000 years ago based on the evidence. God would have had to have created it with that evidence already present for that to be true.
The point is that god would have had to have created the evidence to look inconsistent with a 6000 year old universe.
21 Jul 08
Originally posted by KellyJayPlease, KellyJay, can we skip the religious ranting and talk science...
"So god could then set things up specifically to fool us into believing the universe to be 14 odd bil year old when it really is 6K."
Actually, the Word of God tells you how it was all put together, you
reject that and come up with your own version; it isn't God that is
doing any fooling here.
Kelly
Or go to the Religious Forum and rant there...
All others, don't respond to any religious trolling... Let's keep the Science Forum about Science.
22 Jul 08
1 edit
Originally posted by FabianFnasYou are such a hypocrite, do you see the title of this post? The thread
Please, KellyJay, can we skip the religious ranting and talk science...
Or go to the Religious Forum and rant there...
All others, don't respond to any religious trolling... Let's keep the Science Forum about Science.
deals with someone questioning evolution having a bias. Did you see
how I initially responded to the thread? With just pointing out that
everyone brings to the table bias, assumptions and so on. The point
of this thread was to question someone because of their beliefs,
before the points were given a fair hearing here you see the word
bias being attached to their points. I suggest if you want a purely
science topic, or threads, you stick to just the data and leave people’s
faith and intent alone, instead of claiming people views on evolution
should be questioned because of their bias and not their arguments
alone.
Kelly
22 Jul 08
Originally posted by PsychoPawnIf you want to discuss what it does say I suggest you start a thread in
Where in the word of god does it say that he put the light in transit as mentioned? Where does it mention that he put fossils in the ground that makes it look like they've been there for millions of years and that life has gradually changed?
Scientists didn't just come up with our own version, they looked at the evidence and worked out what the evidenc ...[text shortened]... ould have had to have created the evidence to look inconsistent with a 6000 year old universe.
the spiritual forum and I'll answer your questions.
Kelly