Bush Advocates Teaching ID in Schools

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 9 2005 @ 03:56 PM
link   
JTL
How about trying something new?
How about READING THE THREAD befoer spouting your idiocy?
Then maybe, possibly, you could...... wait a minute.......... actually make a contribution to the thread! WOW what an idea! Maybe you should try it!
As I have asked you to do earlier in the thread after you spewed your crap, unless you can put a cap on your vitrol, do not bother posting.
Take your insane hatred and trolling practices off to your own little world.
Let the adults talk.




posted on Aug, 9 2005 @ 04:05 PM
link   
James, gravity is a FACT, not a theory. You really should control your emotions.

As for ID, creationism or evolution, all are theories imo. All require faith in them.



posted on Aug, 9 2005 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
James, gravity is a FACT, not a theory. You really should control your emotions.

As for ID, creationism or evolution, all are theories imo. All require faith in them.


Newton's theory of gravity actually is a "theory." To the extent people take it as "fact" is in the same sense one may call evolution (also a theory) a fact.

en.wikipedia.org...

Gravity is the force of attraction between massive particles due to their mass. Weight is determined by the mass of an object and its location in a gravitational field. While a great deal is known about the properties of gravity, the ultimate cause of the gravitational force remains an open question. General relativity is the most successful theory of gravitation to date. It postulates that mass and energy curve space-time, resulting in the phenomenon known as gravity.

The first mathematical formulation of gravity was published in 1687 by Sir Isaac Newton. His law of universal gravitation was the standard theory of gravity until work by Albert Einstein and others on general relativity. Since calculations in general relativity are complicated, and Newtonian gravity is sufficiently accurate for most applications, when dealing with weak gravitational fields (i.e., launching rockets, projectiles, pendulums, etc.), Newton's formulae are generally preferred.

Even laws and "facts" can change. That's why it's science. That's why they're theories.

But it's a straw man to say one must have "faith" in the theory of evolution, just as it would be to demand one have "faith" in the theory of gravity. Just because I can't prove the hand of God isn't pushing me down instead of the postulate of attractions between mass, doesn't mean I throw the foundation of modern physics out the window anymore than I do the cornerstone of biology.



posted on Aug, 9 2005 @ 04:23 PM
link   
oh boy... i think bush is trying to push his religious agenda.



posted on Aug, 9 2005 @ 04:36 PM
link   
Thank you to both Intrepid and RANT


As for ID, creationism or evolution, all are theories imo. All require faith in them.

There is a degree of faith in everything even that the sun will rise (hopfully
) tomorrow.



But it's a straw man to say one must have "faith" in the theory of evolution, just as it would be to demand one have "faith" in the theory of gravity. Just because I can't prove the hand of God isn't pushing me down instead of the postulate of attractions between mass, doesn't mean I throw the foundation of modern physics out the window anymore than I do the cornerstone of biology.


I agree with you, science should not be tossed out even when science has to be updated to include new information. Example, Neaderthal is no longer considered one of our ancestors. DNA evidence proves that Neaderthal was a secondary "human" species that developed around the same time as Homo Sapiens.



posted on Aug, 9 2005 @ 04:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by RANT
But it's a straw man to say one must have "faith" in the theory of evolution, just as it would be to demand one have "faith" in the theory of gravity. Just because I can't prove the hand of God isn't pushing me down instead of the postulate of attractions between mass, doesn't mean I throw the foundation of modern physics out the window anymore than I do the cornerstone of biology.


As you said Newton's theory, as it was, was a theory at the time. I am not a mathmetitian, I don't understand the nuances of the math that followed. However, I can readily see the effects in my day to day life. I require NO belief in it, it's a fact. If it were not, I'd be floating away somewhere without air, which also needs gravity to keep it in place on our planet. I DO NOT see exact data, for the lack of a better word, on ID, creationism or evolution.

The other three I see as theories, or beliefs.



posted on Aug, 9 2005 @ 10:22 PM
link   
.
School of thought?

Perceval Lowells martian civilization was a 'school of thought'.

Satanism is a 'school of thought'.

The flat Earth is a 'school of thought'.

Consulting Phone Psychics relies on a 'school of thought'.

FYI being a 'school of thought' amounts to a sum total of Zero credibility by itself.

School of thought = theory.

Evolution is taught as currently the best scientifically based explanatory school of thought on existing variety and development of species that fits with fossil records, geology, Biology, Genetics, DNA, and doesn't require magic additions to physics and chemistry.

ID and Creationism, thus far, rely on magic.

ID and Creationism are NOT based on science.
That is precisely why they have NO BUSINESS being taught in a public school as anything credible let alone a science class.

Proving them also is problematic because the these theories were created not as a derivation from data, but will be attempting to go the other war around [cart before the horse].

If someday someone with a genuinely open mind finds tangible evidence that is somehow able to counter balance or over-ride the Mountain ranges of data supporting Evolution, I, along with rational people will certainly be willing to listen.

But for now 'Magic' schools of thought [theories] have to share the stage with Harry Potter, who is IMO far more interesting to read about.

If you think any or everything that is a school of thought should be taught in taxpayers funded schools, you ARE an idiot.

Bush is an idiot.
.



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 12:14 AM
link   
ID and creationism are of course magical thinking, that is the only "school of thought" to which such ideations belong. They are merely another banner for the evangelistas to pray beneath. These idiots would turn back to their medieval ideologies for the feudal system, forsaking science altogether.

Sure [with my tongue deep in my cheek], we need to forget history, let's go back to the divine right of kings. Even The Enlightenment of the Rennaisance was such a bad idea. And the Age of Reason never really happened, it says so in the Bible...

Let us never forget the patriot Thomas Paine, and his 1794 work "The Age of Reason." Without caveat, his writing is proof that the early US was a hotbed of freethinkers, some ready to cast off the oppression of religion entirely. It wasn't merely anti-Catholicism but as Paine pointed out, the Bible seems full of blasphemies!

Religious rightwingers need to wake up to all that has happened over the course of the last few centuries. History did not end 2,000 years ago and people have been living all over the Earth making their own histories for a very long time. Yes, it is very important to compare ideas basing upon logic and reason. As such, if documents like The Ten Commandments are important in public courts, so then should much older legal directives, i.e. Hammurabi's Code. Indeed, the friezes of the Supreme Court include them both.



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 03:34 AM
link   
To be honest I don't see the problem.

Evolution is a theory, so is Intelligent Design. Neither one has been proven as of yet.

If evolution is taught in schools then why shouldn't Intelligent Design be taught?



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by deesw
. I refuse to believe that I am an accident.


If we're to deny ignorance, would it not be more prudent to keep an open mind? Outright refusal won't allow us to escape those trappings of denial.

Besides which...evolution doesn't quite equal accidental.

Evolution is suggesting things change for a purpose. To adapt. To survive.

That's not accidental.

If anything, it's quite, quite deliberate.



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 08:38 AM
link   
.
Clarification for Simon_the_byron,

Evolution is a SCIENCE based theory,

ID and Creationism are MAGIC based theories.

You want the entire Hogwart curriculum to be taught as well?

Science - based on FACTs
Magic - based on fantasy

You teach Evolution in a science class
and ID and creationism in a MAGIC class.

Why are so many adults so juvenile in their thinking?
.



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 08:45 AM
link   
It never ends.
Here is the latest on the Kansas situation.



(CBS/AP) The Kansas Board of Education voted 6-4 to include greater criticism of evolution in its school science standards, but it decided to send the standards to an outside academic for review before taking a final vote.
The Kansas school system was ridiculed around the country in 1999 when the board deleted most references to evolution. The system later reversed course, but the language favored by the board Tuesday comes from advocates of intelligent design or creationism.



Kansas Board OKs Evolution Knock



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by slank
.Evolution is a SCIENCE based theory,

ID and Creationism are MAGIC based theories.

Why are so many adults so juvenile in their thinking?
.


That's funny because it is Evolution that states mutations happen in a seemingly random fashion. But yet, these random mutations, which could take us backwards or forwards, have been able to create extremely complex organisms. Now, that seems like magic.

I think it's juvenile not to be able to explain why you believe what you do. You have done nothing but post empty rhetoric.



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 03:53 PM
link   
Well Rant beat me to it, Gravity is not a fact but a theory!!!!!!! Sorry Intrepid but it is a theory and all these ignoramuses who say evolution is wrong because it is a theory need to jump off a tall building or bridge. Gravity is is wrong because it is a theory, yet they don't because they are hypocrits!

It would be cool though to see on tv...

"The death toll so far is over 30million and rising. No one is sure why but all the republicans just started jumping of tall buildings yelling something about 'Theories are satan' before they splattered into the pavement."



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Simon_the_byron
To be honest I don't see the problem.

Evolution is a theory, so is Intelligent Design. Neither one has been proven as of yet.

If evolution is taught in schools then why shouldn't Intelligent Design be taught?


How about teaching both? ID can be adressed at the beginning of the course.

"Class, one theory of origins is that we magically poofed into existence as the result of an intelligent designer. That concludes our section on ID, there will be a quiz Wednesday. We will now spend the remainder of the course showing examples of species with intermediate eyeballs, and intermediate forms in the fossil record as we discuss the numerous theories that fall under the blanket description commonly known as evolution."

We might also throw in a course on critical thinking and the scientific process in general while we're at it.



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 07:24 PM
link   
Things do not just fall toward each other, they also cease falling. In principle a theory of gravity should describe both of these phenomena. Which is to say, the word gravity should connote not only falling but also standing (or, you might say, rising), not only unity but also multiplicity, not only black holes but also atoms. In other words, a theory of gravity should be an essentially quantum theory, a truly general theory — a theory of everything. Einstein's general theory of relativity is not general in this truly general sense. Better than anyone, Einstein understood this fact — which is why he spent the last several decades of his life trying to generalize his “general” theory

This is a direct quote from www.gravity.org
It is a scientific website devoted solely to the "Theory of Gravity". Look it up james.



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 07:25 PM
link   
Notice it never says anywhere " The Fact of gravity "



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 07:31 PM
link   
Yes, gravity is able to predict certain occurences in nature, but not one of the theories is able to explain each specific instance of gravity.

With evolution, evolution is able to explain microevolution, speciation, natural selection, and a few other points. But, macroevoution is still hotly contested as well as some issues such as punctuated equilibrium.

Some other problems with evolution that I believe exist are the theory of truly random mutation, and nondirectional evolution. I refuse to believe that order does not exist, which these points seem to imply.

[edit on 10-8-2005 by Jamuhn]



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 09:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by ulshadow
oh boy... i think bush is trying to push his religious agenda.


That's exactly it, and it's hurting the country. His endorsement of magical thinking detracts once more from science. Deliberately, he is adding to the growing antiscientific sentiment in the US. A recent book, 'The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America" blames government for the phenomenon. The author, Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt, former Senior Policy Advisor in the US Department of Education, blew the whistle on government activities.

The US once had pride in its scientific and engineering achievements. But now, Pacific Rim nations are pushing ahead of the U.S. in engineering. Very shameful for a nation that only a generation ago, explored the Moon and safely returned all twelve who visited the lunar surface. But the Apollo Program was only one of an amazing myriad of technical accomplishments of the the formerly innovative American spirit.

We are allowing the terrorists to win by hiding our collective head in a hole of religious fundamentalism.



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 09:43 PM
link   


That's exactly it, and it's hurting the country. His endorsement of magical thinking detracts once more from science.


What magical thinking do you speak of? I surely hope you are not refering to his Christian beliefs.






top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join