Louisiana About to Pass Law to Teach Creationism!!

reply to post by Tomis_Nexis


Oh, for sure, but with the modern basis for science being what it is (falsifiability, physical evidence, repeatable results), the two shouldn't go together. Unless they have a class entitled "Theories with Differing Amounts of Scientific Evidence, From Zero to Almost-Certainly-On-The-Money", I can't see a single class appropriately teaching both.

Originally posted by '___'eviant
reply to post by Tomis_Nexis

 

Oh, for sure, but with the modern basis for science being what it is (falsifiability, physical evidence, repeatable results), the two shouldn't go together. Unless they have a class entitled "Theories with Differing Amounts of Scientific Evidence, From Zero to Almost-Certainly-On-The-Money", I can't see a single class appropriately teaching both.

Science - trial and error. At least they don't stop looking for the "answers", instead of resorting to a book based on word of mouth.

Originally posted by Tomis_Nexis

Originally posted by '___'eviant
reply to post by Tomis_Nexis

 

Oh, for sure, but with the modern basis for science being what it is (falsifiability, physical evidence, repeatable results), the two shouldn't go together. Unless they have a class entitled "Theories with Differing Amounts of Scientific Evidence, From Zero to Almost-Certainly-On-The-Money", I can't see a single class appropriately teaching both.

Science - trial and error. At least they don't stop looking for the "answers", instead of resorting to a book based on word of mouth.

well i guess if you had a time machine you would go back and give them a video camera to record everything.

remember one thing , in those times they recordered everything on stone and word of mouth, they didnt have the technology of today they used what they had of those times, so creationism's ecidence cant be totaly false.

it could be possible in 2000 years from now they might find a better way of recording events or data and people like me and you say they recorded data this way it can be true?

in the end of the day we dont know so we cant be 100% right if it happen or not

How can any of you imply that this will set the state back in standards of education?

Quick thought, do you know what our grandparents, (the greatest generation) were taught? They seemed to do alright.

Is it possible that creationism and evolution are one and the same?

PLEASE, stop implying that all people who know that God created this universe are uneducated morons who couldn't spoon feed ourselves applesauce.

I will be getting a science based degree in four months, and I see nothing in evolution that proves that creationism is not the start of all life on this planet.

I'm not a proponent of ID, but if it stirs up this much angst among the hard left, let's teach it in pys ed., home ec., shop class, history, math, science. Let's have ID clubs and brown-bag seminars in the auditorium during lunch.

But, even if we do that, the theory with the best science will still win out in the long run.

Schools used to teach a static universe. Einstein believed in a static universe. He introduced the cosmological constant to make his equations work and called the constant his greatest mistake.

Guess what?

No one believes in a static universe anymore.

[edit on 2008/6/20 by GradyPhilpott]

Originally posted by jasonjnelson
How can any of you imply that this will set the state back in standards of education?

simple if we start teaching myth as fact that would be a step back.

Quick thought, do you know what our grandparents, (the greatest generation) were taught? They seemed to do alright.

so your recommending that we go back to single school houses?

Is it possible that creationism and evolution are one and the same?

no. evolution is the study of how life has changed and adapted over the course of history, creationism is the believe the god created life, evolution does not make any statements as to how life started.

I will be getting a science based degree in four months, and I see nothing in evolution that proves that creationism is not the start of all life on this planet.

that maybe, but you can't scientifically prove creationism.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
But, even if we do that, the theory with the best science will still win out in the long run.

the problem here is that creationism has no science to teach, if a creationist does come up with a theory I'm sure that the scientific community will be happy to listen

Originally posted by gate13

well i guess if you had a time machine you would go back and give them a video camera to record everything.

remember one thing , in those times they recordered everything on stone and word of mouth, they didnt have the technology of today they used what they had of those times, so creationism's ecidence cant be totaly false.

it could be possible in 2000 years from now they might find a better way of recording events or data and people like me and you say they recorded data this way it can be true?

in the end of the day we dont know so we cant be 100% right if it happen or not

So it's okay to believe something of word of mouth 2000 years ago, but half the things your read on the internet aren't true...but this 2000 year old story must be, which is based on people who did mushrooms and psychedelics.

And don't be sarcastic with the video camera comment, you people here demand proof. And I know they didn't have the technology of today AND THAT'S MY POINT...in these times word of mouth is almost useless without proof, people were gullible back then, as most still are now.

[edit on 20-6-2008 by Tomis_Nexis]

reply to post by Mr Mxyztplk


Let me rephrase the obvious. Evolution and creationism are not the "same thing", however they are by no means mutually exclusive.

Second, who ever said my grandparents went to one room school houses. Fighter? Maybe it should read "makestuffupper"

And how in the WORLD is teaching that creationism is a THEORY a step back in education?
Seriously, answer that without a condescending remark or without citing obvious Science that by no means excludes a creator?

BTW, what is your theory for where this all came from? A Magic Big Bang?

reply to post by jasonjnelson


I'm curious as to how you can equate a biblical story to scientific study, and how you can justify teaching religious text in a secular classroom?

That being the case, do you think it's fair to force one group's religious views upon someone else's children?

If you want to pull religion out of schools, and you define creationism theory as religion, then you need to pull evolution, too. Compare them side by side. Both are beliefs concerning origins that are unprovable and must be taken on faith. One involves faith in a higher power, the other in the opinions of scientists. Both are faith-based beliefs, however, and, in my opinion, neither of them belong in schools.

Originally posted by maria_stardust
reply to post by jasonjnelson

 

I'm curious as to how you can equate a biblical story to scientific study, and how you can justify teaching religious text in a secular classroom?

That being the case, do you think it's fair to force one group's religious views upon someone else's children?

The story of a higher power creating our universe, and world, is not unique to any religion, and some peoples recognized this fact without even worshipping those they assumed created it.

And all evolution has told me is that nature adapts.

Seems to me that if I was God, I would have included that in my creation.

There is NO scientific PROOF that we come from single celled micro-organisms. Just theories and "evidence" that is only given credence in the light f those same theories. Nothing new has been proposed in hundreds of years.

And teaching what a majority of the world holds to be VERY TRUE, (think that the Jews, Christians and Muslims believe in the same God) Does not in any way conflict with science. Science has not proven that God does not exist. And teaching a THEORY like this does not infringe on the rights of the non-believers anymore than the theory of the big bang infringes on believers.

Besides, point out where in the constitution it guarantees the separation of Church and state in the classroom? Oh thats right, schools were never MEANT to be a federal institution.

reply to post by maria_stardust

Precisely. How does one go about teaching creationism without referencing God or the Bible. It can't be done. The story of creation is strictly in grounded in biblical scripture.

Not necessarily...as shiftshaper said:

If you teach 'creationism', what do you teach? This is the main problem as i see it. Are they going to teach that we have been genetically modified by Aliens or are they going to go with the theory of the bible?

I have no problem with Creationism/Intelligent Design in schools alongside evolution. As long as they teach all the intelligent design theories, and pan-spermia. If the state insists on inundating my kids with the 3,000 year old mythology of goat-herders: they best be giving ALL sides of the story not just the Moses & Jesus side. Anyway, in my opinion Genesis (which was derived from the Enuma Elish...it HAD to be) was probably the account of a primitive people who would have no way of knowing that the scientists that created all this were scientists and not gods.

Wait, I don't have any kids and if I did they'd be home-schooled and not programmed by the government.

reply to post by jasonjnelson

Quick thought, do you know what our grandparents, (the greatest generation) were taught? They seemed to do alright.

The greatest generation? According to whom? Tom Brokaw? In my opinion it is the so-called "Greatest Generation" and the Boomers who are responsible for a LARGE portion of the misery we suffer through today! It is this same generation who is now sticking their heads in the sand and saying: "Ah well...I'll be dead before any of these crap systems fall down."

reply to post by GradyPhilpott

I'm not a proponent of ID, but if it stirs up this much angst among the hard left, let's teach it in pys ed., home ec., shop class, history, math, science. Let's have ID clubs and brown-bag seminars in the auditorium during lunch.

This kind of attitude is one of the reasons we're probably doomed. "Yeah, I don't like what this guy feels/believes in so lets rub his nose in what will really make him crazy! Then let's watch him squirm and writhe in pain." Seriously, grow-up.

reply to post by saturnine_sweet


Evolution is a theory based on scientific evidence. True it is incomplete, hence it is referred to as theory. Contrary to your assertion, science is not a religlion.

Creationism is a Christian story found in the bible. Since there is no scientific proof for its validity, belief in it requires a leap of faith. I don't think I need to mention the religious aspect of this belief.

science is, by definition, provable through experimentation. Evolution fails that test. It is a faith in the assumptions and theories of those deemed qualified. If it were any sort of "truth," it would not have changed almost entirely from the time it was proposed until now. Its a faith based on reasoning, based on science, but its still a faith based system to explain things that cannot be proven. Just because you call it science doesnt change the fact that it is based on faith in scientists, rather than on provable, solid science.

reply to post by eric52081


the fact is we and much of the life here was created...there is evolution going on,but nothing like apes turining into humans and such stuff like that.

think about it..research it..feel it

Originally posted by jasonjnelson
Evolution and creationism are not the "same thing", however they are by no means mutually exclusive.

one has proof behind it the other conjecture.

Second, who ever said my grandparents went to one room school houses. Fighter? Maybe it should read "makestuffupper"

you referred to "the greatest generation", the majority of whom lived in rural areas with single room schools. they were around until the 40's, still prominent in the twenties and thirties.

And how in the WORLD is teaching that creationism is a THEORY a step back in education?

because creationism is not a theory it is a believe.

BTW, what is your theory for where this all came from? A Magic Big Bang?

I'm agnostic, so I don't know.

reply to post by maria_stardust


Oh, and I wanted to add, creationism has NOTHING to do with the bible. God, I hate when people spout that sort of thing. You do realize that there are an awful lot of religions that have nothing to do with the bible? Creationism has to do with the belief that something that supersedes our current perceived reality had to have been responsible for the origin of either life, the universe, or both, depending on what line of thought you follow. Perhaps if you educated yourself on such beliefs, you would be able to see that a belief in evolution is no different than a belief in a god, except that scientists are the gods.

edit for spelling

[edit on 6/20/2008 by saturnine_sweet]

reply to post by jasonjnelson


There is a difference between intelligent design and creationism. One says God create the world in six days, and the other says the universe was created by an unknown higher power.

The problem resides in the fact that a Christian movement would like to introduce religious doctrine, creationism into our schools. If that fails, then they are willing to fall back on introducing intelligent design.

In other words, if they can't introduce God into the classroom, then they want to introduce the idea of a higher power. It's a bait-and-switch runaround.

There is a basis for the seperation of church and state in that it is a recognized and legitimate political and legal doctrine. Just because it is not specifically spelled out in the Constitution doesn't mean stands without merit.

And in case you have forgotten, although this nation was founded by fundamentalist Christians, it is no longer a strictly fundamentalist Christian nation.

I respect the fact that there are parents who want their children to learn about creationism, and that's fine and dandy. However, those same parents should not have the right to push their personal religious beliefs upon children other than their own. There's no respect in that.

Bottom line, if you want your child to learn about creationism as an alternative to evolution, then have them learn it at home or at Sunday school.

reply to post by Malynn


"...the scientists that created all this were scientists and not gods."

BINGO!! Hugs and kisses. That's the problem with the polarized, absolutist, extremist thinking. No one is seeing the logical middle ground. Assuming it's true that we are, at least in part, the product of SOME level of intelligently nonhuman work, tinkering, adjusting, the REAL issue is that THEY (PLURAL) are simply intelligent BEINGS and NOT "gods" (or "God") to be grovelled before like drooling idiot slaves. But too many are too busy fearing and ignoring to bother searching for truth with any reasonable lack of bias. The answer isn't in either 2 extremist arguments of absolute creationism versus absolute evolution.

(a few minutes later): Need to add that I don't discount the possibility of there being a Single Creator of some sort, but mere BELIEF in one has jack to do with reality-based, sound thinking. The whole secrecy-based concept of government (as we know it) is all about avoiding the truth about the (very apparently) PLURAL nonhuman presence.




[edit on 20-6-2008 by Lightworth]