Why can’t Creationists teach an alternative? Are the ‘free thinkers’ - atheists scared of som

Originally posted by EdCase512
This is why, creationism, OT, will not become accepted until the ignorant control the system. (and it gets scarily closer every day).


The teaching of creation "science" in public schools in the United States effectively ended in 1987 with the United States Supreme Court decision in Edwards v. Aguillard. The court affirmed that a statute requiring the teaching of creation science alongside evolution when evolution is taught in Louisiana public schools was unconstitutional because its sole true purpose was to advance a particular religious belief.

By all means take Jesus as your Messiah, take the bible as your guide. But stop trying to glorify a myth as hard science.
There is simply no,none,nada,zip empirical evidence to back up these claims.
Realising this the "smart" fundementalists made creationism become born again as Intelligent Design. Marginally more elegant and plausible. But still highly suspect and definitely religious in intent. It is simply not science.

Ed, you have been in and out here...let me re-clarify.....


There are those scientists out there, bonified, endorsed, accepted, tenured, etc....


That have questions/observations/criticisms of the Evolutionary THEORY....yet they ARE NOT HEARD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


A one-sided argument is not an ARGUMENT...but a MONOPOLY......



Why? Why? Can't others SEEEEEEEEEEEE this????? What is there to fear?

OT

reply to post by OldThinker


The term "scientist" covers many fields. I would not trust a geologist if he declared he had the cure to cancer. Why would I trust him to tell me the "real" truth of the origins of life ?

Outside of their chosen speciality, they are no longer "experts" they are simply John Q. Public stating their beliefs..no different to you or I.

The fear comes from religion attempting to co-opt the education system and inject a religious bias under the guise of "science."

Religion has no place in schools or in Government. Surely observation of the theocratic states that do exist should make this obvious even to the most devout.

reply to post by Welfhard


Hmmmmm.

I'm aware what people think and I don't really care - it's not of my concern when

I, myself, know of no absolute truth.

I rest my case... At least you are now showing honesty...

But you cannot actually know me from the outside, you do know know my beyond the context of these arguments we have, you do not know my dreams or aspirations - you do not know me inside.

Your words, Not mine...

But do You know yourself ???

But anyway it is refreshing to know you are honest with you thoughts, to some degree anyway.

Thanks for the debate.

I guess we are on opposite sides of the debate....

But really this experience you are enjoying, is about yourself and it doesn't matter what I or anyone else understands.

In the end of your experience, In this World there is only You.....

As All have left you, to be on your own, after your last breath, to learn of new and exciting things beyond your wildest imagination...

Good fortune in your travels I do have admiration for you, in a strange sort of way, in that you are another component of the All and No Less...

reply to post by OldThinker


Every single account that I have seen of a scientist whatever who has had a criticism toward evolutionary theory has just been used to further the religious agenda - to usurp evolution with creationism.

And it comes down to these two things.
1) The problems have answers that even I can find (meaning it's the creationists making things up once again).
2) That it's one of those few very small holes in the theory not yet filled out.

If the latter then you should wait for science to find the answer. Science doesn't know everything and it knows it doesn't know everything - otherwise it would stop. Gravity is a theory, too you know. And we are still learning things about it today (granted very minuscule things).

But only when it comes to evolutionary theory will people pickup these tiny 'unknowns' and use them as attacks on science suggesting that the whole theory is wrong because of a few 'unknowns'. Evolution happens, micro and macro - the evidence is everywhere - but our understanding of the mechanisms are not yet absolute - nothing is - nothing can be.

However having said that, it must be stress that evolution is THE backbone to ALL of biology. Every aspect of the study of life lends itself to evolution and every find confirms and cross confirms evolution and all the other disciplines of biology. There is no other explanation on Earth that explains the diversity of life like evolution does and for one hundred and fifty years, everything we have found and everything we already knew backed evolution.

Fossil record.
DNA.
The problem of extinction (and there still being life everywhere).
Adaptation.
Niches.
Observed instances of evolution.

All of it stands and universally points to evolution - the single explanation for why life is what it is.

[edit on 20-8-2009 by Welfhard]

reply to post by EdCase512





Friend, slow down.......


OT's not talking about a football illustration ...in a baseball game!


I'll RE-RE-clarify.....


Those RELATED-discipline-experts....biology, pedology, geology, cosmology...etc....


who hold to an ID-possibility.....are ostrasized......rejected......end up at Washington bible College, in the science department....are you saying that IS FAIR>>>>>>>GOOD FOR ACADEMIA????


Can the ole guy be more clear?

reply to post by The Matrix Traveller

I'm aware what people think and I don't really care - it's not of my concern when

I, myself, know of no absolute truth.

I rest my case... At least you are now showing honesty...

No one knows any absolute truths as we are limited to our perception - some people even say that we cannot know anything.

Your words, Not mine...

But do You know yourself ?

I'm learning.

But anyway it is refreshing to know you are honest with you thoughts, to some degree anyway.

In what way, where am I not being honest?

Thanks for the debate.

Sure thing.

[edit on 20-8-2009 by Welfhard]

Originally posted by OldThinker
reply to post by EdCase512

 

Friend, slow down.......


OT's not talking about a football illustration ...in a baseball game!


I'll RE-RE-clarify.....


Those RELATED-discipline-experts....biology, pedology, geology, cosmology...etc....


who hold to an ID-possibility.....are ostrasized......rejected......end up at Washington bible College, in the science department....are you saying that IS FAIR>>>>>>>GOOD FOR ACADEMIA????


Can the ole guy be more clear?

Sorry OT, Acedemia is the most vital place to have teachers without bias in the field of science.
Fair ? In what way does fairness enter the equation ? They are free to believe how they will, remember they are not being excluded for a belief in a "creator". They are being excluded for wanting to teach their classes using a theory that has an underlying religious message.

Religion based beliefs belong at best in the Philosophy Department.

Always remember. Belief is a many edged weapon. Sometimes it will cut in a way you don't enjoy.

reply to post by The Matrix Traveller



Hey MT, glad you are back.....

did you have time to see the post on Neurologist, Doctor Ben Carson?

Here's a quick, sobering overview: www.veoh.com...#

I like the way, he is settled, as you are, around ANGER/PEACE/CONTENTMENT


OT

reply to post by Welfhard

But only when it comes to evolutionary theory will people pickup these tiny 'unknowns' and use then as attacks on science suggesting that the whole theory is wrong. Evolution happens, micro and macro - the evidence is everywhere - but our understanding of the mechanisms are not yet absolute.

However having said that, it must be stress that evolution is THE backbone to ALL of biology. Every aspect of the study of life lends itself to evolution and every find confirms and cross confirms evolution and all the other disciplines of biology. There is no other explanation on Earth that explains the diversity of life like evolution does and for one hundred and fifty years, everything we have found and everything we already knew backed evolution.

Yes I can say you may be correct, but all this is based only on the Primates understanding, and at the very least, based on a Lack of knowledge!

A few primate Letters mean nothing at all, after a Primates name...

Outside the primate community, they are totally worthless this also includes those of the primate I experience.

I don't mean this in a derogatory way but as a Fact!

Guess this place really is "The Planet of The Apes".

I think it is the funniest place (Earth) I have ever come across.

We have a saying;

Why on earth, would you want to go to the Earth ???

But my question is....

What Produced the rules that govern Evolution ???

And how are they implemented ???

I am Not an Anti Evolutionist, I just question the understanding of the Primates....

Human Primates are indeed a worry !

Aren't' they ???

Originally posted by EdCase512
.......Religion based beliefs belong at best in the Philosophy Department.
....

Yes, I agree....


Let's put religion/faith/JC/Buddha/etc etc.... aside....


OUT OF THE EQUATION.....


What do we do with those evolution-related/feild scientists...who have questions/criticisms of the theory?

They are NOT heard....this isn't fair correct?

Nor is TRUTH given a chance, brcause of loop-sided testing...

OT

Great job on both sides....


Thank you to all....


OT tired.....

Got dragons to slay tomorrow, so I gotta sleep....


Talk to both sides tomorrow

OT out!@

reply to post by OldThinker


I will get back to you on this in an hour or two I have to go... Back soon.

reply to post by The Matrix Traveller

Guess this place really is "The Planet of The Apes".

Not a bad point this, if a little cryptic. But yes human is technically ape and part of the Great Ape wider family so yes, planet of the apes it is.

What Produced the rules that govern Evolution ?

You could ask this of any naturally occurring phenomenon and the rules and laws involved and I could go into detail or resort to short answers of things like determinism, entropy, cause and effect, emergence, etc. but somehow I feel no answer besides 'god' would be acceptable to you. It's so easy when you get to set the parameters of an acceptable answer yourself, and how many people will set them in an unbiased way? So...

What's 1 divided by 0?

Human Primates are indeed a worry !

Aren't' they ?

Some. The anti-intellectual ones anyway.

[edit on 20-8-2009 by Welfhard]

reply to post by OldThinker

What do we do with those evolution-related/feild scientists...who have questions/criticisms of the theory?

They are NOT heard....this isn't fair correct?

Perhaps let them debate it with their peers first and if whatever they are cannot be resolved then let them do studies and research to find some answers and submit them to peer review.

You see what you don't understand is that there are scientists in every field who have criticism and questions of theories of their fields and they - like everyone else - discuss it with their peers or get research grants. But you don't make threads about them, do you??? No. You only look at the Evolution ones and pretend that it's a travesty and that people aren't being heard despite the fact that science isn't a forum! Bias much?

That's how science takes care of problems. Do I need to bring the chart up again because I will.

reply to post by Edrick

1. Evolution is only a Theory.

Actually, this is incorrect; Just because folks keep saying that evolution is only a theory, does not make this statement correct. Evolution is a scientific fact and has been established and is continuing to be established. Just because we do not know everything about it, does not make it only a theory (if this were the case, then electromagnetism and relativity would only be theories).

[edit on 20-8-2009 by whatsup]

Originally posted by OldThinker

Originally posted by Helmkat
.....For myself this whole issue was never a problem. I was not raised in a very religious home and was given free will to synergize my beliefs as I saw fit. .....

Hey Helmkat,

So glad you joined...

Regarding your post, that's great, you had engaged parents....have you considered maybe others didn't?

What is to become of them? they will never hear, qualified, smart, scienctists, in a number of areas of study, who have questions/concerns/peer-reviewed experiencments...that contradict the Biology 101 status-quo....you are not for that I know?

OT-none of us is as smart as all of us!!!!!

edit a word

[edit on 20-8-2009 by OldThinker]

What is to become of them?

Whatever they choose of course.

Someone wants to understand what Creationism is all about, they go to a Theology class. Want to understand Evolution? Go to biology class.

Keep the facts in Science and keep the Faith in Religion.

They can co-exist as they are, there is no need for fear from either side.

Make no mistake though Creationism is not science and its discussion does not belong in a Science venue. You can't slip a new cover on a book of faith and call it science. Should it be discussed? Sure, in the forum where it belongs.

Thus we find ourselves feeding back upon ourselves. Until Creationists can come to terms that Evolution is not an attack on faith (at least no more so then any other theory) this debate will continue.

Originally posted by OldThinker

Originally posted by EdCase512
This is why, creationism, OT, will not become accepted until the ignorant control the system. (and it gets scarily closer every day).


The teaching of creation "science" in public schools in the United States effectively ended in 1987 with the United States Supreme Court decision in Edwards v. Aguillard. The court affirmed that a statute requiring the teaching of creation science alongside evolution when evolution is taught in Louisiana public schools was unconstitutional because its sole true purpose was to advance a particular religious belief.

By all means take Jesus as your Messiah, take the bible as your guide. But stop trying to glorify a myth as hard science.
There is simply no,none,nada,zip empirical evidence to back up these claims.
Realising this the "smart" fundementalists made creationism become born again as Intelligent Design. Marginally more elegant and plausible. But still highly suspect and definitely religious in intent. It is simply not science.

Ed, you have been in and out here...let me re-clarify.....


There are those scientists out there, bonified, endorsed, accepted, tenured, etc....


That have questions/observations/criticisms of the Evolutionary THEORY....yet they ARE NOT HEARD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


A one-sided argument is not an ARGUMENT...but a MONOPOLY......



Why? Why? Can't others SEEEEEEEEEEEE this????? What is there to fear?

OT

Capitol letters do not a fact make.

The argument is far from one sided and is not a monopoly.

Absolutes are misleading in this discussion.

The issue is not that these Scientist have not been heard, because they have and when reviewed did not pass the rigors of review. Simple as that. The work of these Scientists is still available for others to see and read and can be found through a host of sources. That being said though Creationism cannot ever pass the rigors of Scientific review and why? because its Religion, not Science

There are those scientists out there, bonified, endorsed, accepted, tenured, etc....

Does that make them always right? No. Does that make them exempt from peer review? No.

That have questions/observations/criticisms of the Evolutionary THEORY....yet they ARE NOT HEARD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sorry but thats not true, you can find their work easily and hear them anytime you want. Its just that their work has not passed the rigors of review. Let me guess though, you want it taught in the Science classroom anyway, ever though Peers (and the law) have clearly said this is religion?

a one-sided argument is not an ARGUMENT...but a MONOPOLY......

That you are in the argument already disproves your statement, it is plainly not one sided or a monoply.

Why? Why? Can't others SEEEEEEEEEEEE this????? What is there to fear?

Sight is a funny thing, light enters the eye but what the brain translates is often something else entirely. From your perch you see science shutting down opinion, From my perch I see the Scientific method at work, filtering out matters of faith from matters of fact.

reply to post by Welfhard


and they all rang out across the globe - strong, loud and united:

"Chart! Chart! Chart! Chart!"

reply to post by makinho21

Since you asked so nicely.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/671603c7ad28.jpg[/atsimg]

reply to post by Welfhard

You could ask this of any naturally occurring phenomenon and the rules and laws involved and I could go into detail or resort to short answers of things like determinism, entropy, cause and effect, emergence, etc. but somehow I feel no answer besides 'god' would be acceptable to you. It's so easy when you get to set the parameters of an acceptable answer yourself, and how many people will set them in an unbiased way? So...

Yes I am smiling... in fact I am laughing, along with others seeing this....

But in the kindest way....

But we (sometimes 20 or so) still enjoy your human nature and contribution...

We need some entertainment, during the day/night... 24/7...

Work gets a little tedious at times, so we enjoy your comments, when we get a chance to view them....

What's this ??? I see you are in that Fantasy of yours again regarding your gods...

I do find the thinking of the human Primate so funny at times... ...

I look forward to more of your thoughts to others....

And I will offer my own when I get a chance...

Good luck in the future and may you find what you seek...