Christian Groups Sue to Stop Schools from Adopting Science Standards

reply to post by Unity_99


Unless . . . by design of the oligarchy . . .

said religion is

--the religion of scientism

or

--the religion of witchcraft

or

--the religion of Islam.

THEN . . . everything is hunky dory.

Gag.

hknudzkknexnt
reply to post by Grimpachi

 

I think those are fake though haha

just thought it looks like a fun video to watch on this subject.

They aren't fake. They have alternate explanations. Which explanation you believe is up to you.

Phage
reply to post by BO XIAN

 

Ok.

But that's not how I remember my science classes actually went.
I mean. A lot of it is obviously FACT! Right? An object near Earth's surface actually will accelerate at 32 ft/sec2, won't it?

But I never had evolution rammed down my throat. It was presented as science backed by evidence. These...people...don't want their kids to even hear about it.

edit on 9/29/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Agreed. What these people are doing is stupid. On the other side I did have ideas rammed down my throat that were 100% factually untrue in the pursuit of supporting evolution. I could give you some classical moments back in college where my professor did some rather foolish things.

reply to post by BO XIAN


Sorry, BO XIAN, just trying to elevate the discussion a little. For a second there I thought maybe I was onto something big. Guess I'm not hitting on all cylinders tonight. I'll go back to the drawing board and see if I can come up with something a little more constructive to add.

Man, I was so sure those ideas would catch fire. I still kinda like the snake thing, though. Hmmm...

reply to post by BO XIAN

Science is unique to human activities in that it possesses vast areas of certain knowledge. The collective opinion of scientists in these areas about any problem covered by them will almost always be correct. It is unlikely that much in these areas will be changed in the future, even in a thousand years. And because technology rests almost exclusively on these areas the products of technology work as they are intended to do.

But for areas of uncertain knowledge the story is very different. Indeed the story is pretty well the exact opposite, with the collective opinion of scientists almost always incorrect.

There is an easy proof of this statement. Because of the large number of scientists nowadays and because of the large financial support which they enjoy, uncertain problems would mostly have been cleared up already if it were otherwise. So you can be pretty certain that wherever problems resist solution for an appreciable time by an appreciable number of scientists the ideas used for attacking them must be wrong.

It is therefore a mistake to have anything to do with popular ideas for solving uncertain issues, and the more respectable the ideas may be the more certain it is that they are wrong. [...]

Fred Hoyle: "The Origin of the Universe and the Origin of Religion"

but let us not ignore xtianity's history of extreme psycho-pathological reactions to all things biological,
one does so at one's own peril

reply to post by Phage


So I don't see things the same way as you, I must be lacking, or of lower intelligence?

you have accepted too much that you have been told

Hm? I'm talking about what isn't known yet, not debating current known facts .

recent developments regarding genetic research

Kind of a vague question, what recent developments are you referring to exactly?

kx12x
What is the supporting evidence?

The supporting evidence is laid out for public scrutiny in scientific journals.


Anyone who has observations or experimental data that may counter the evidence may also publish, if they have it.

kx12x
Evolution proves we can adapt and change, but not that we came from apes.

Like phage says, apparently, your education was lacking and you have accepted too much that you have been told about evolutionary theory rather than actually studying it, because evolution does NOT say we came from apes. Its all about a common ancestor.

I've never encountered anyone who actually knows what evolution is, and is still a creationist.

reply to post by alfa1

You quote Phage, then in the same post contradict him about us not being apes... Which is it?

Like phage says, apparently, your education was lacking and you have accepted too much that you have been told about evolutionary theory rather than actually studying it, because evolution does NOT say we came from apes. Its all about a common ancestor.

Actually In one of my previous posts I said prehistoric animal and I was using apes as an example. The whole point was about not knowing the what or who the "common ancestor" was exactly.

reply to post by BO XIAN


Can you show me an example of god answering a prayer?

I don't ask for proof. Just an example.

Surely, if he does, it's possible.

But I'll expect no such thing...

BO XIAN
e.g. . . . raining on 4 sides of a drying mown hay field . . . but not on the desperately needed drying hay.

Eye roll emoticon inserted here.

e.g. A counseling client virtually falling down drunk that seriously sobered instantly when I prayed so. I'd not have allowed her to drive home, otherwise.

Umm, well now I would consider you a danger to whomever you counsel.

You let a drunk operate a car. That is irresponsible, unethical and if you are in a position paid to do this, you should lose your license. I do fear however, that you are an unskilled counsellor ifyou are in that role at all. especially if you are praying to sober people up and then letting them drive home.

That, bo, is stupidity and dangerous.

Enough... this delusion is disturbing. You are seriously worrying.

I've never read anything so absurd...

kx12x
reply to post by Phage

 

Correct. A theory is a hypothesis which has supporting evidence.

What is the supporting evidence? Evolution proves we can adapt and change, but not that we came from apes. There are still too many pieces missing for me to believe, much less say it as fact. If we're 20 or 30 thousand years from the truth then I'd say we're counting our eggs before they hatch.

We did not come from apes.

Yet again this returns as fact.

Wow, you religios folk are either inept, incapable of thinking, or simply trolling for god.

"Derp, they rekon we came from apes, hyuk, science is dumb!"

reply to post by BO XIAN


Lest he be proven a fraud?

Yes.. I think so.

And it's such that you are deluded enough to allow drunks to operate vehicles.

If your god exists, he should shake his head at you.

kx12x
reply to post by alfa1

 

You quote Phage, then in the same post contradict him about us not being apes... Which is it?

Like phage says, apparently, your education was lacking and you have accepted too much that you have been told about evolutionary theory rather than actually studying it, because evolution does NOT say we came from apes. Its all about a common ancestor.

Actually In one of my previous posts I said prehistoric animal and I was using apes as an example. The whole point was about not knowing the what or who the "common ancestor" was exactly.

We share a common ancestor. We did not evolve FROM apes.

There you go again, not grasping the concept.

We are primates. Apes are primates. Chimps are primates. Lemurs are primates. We share a common ancestor.

"So how did humans evolve fromapes then?" ask the religious.

"We didn't." we reply.

"Ahhaha you just contradicted yourselves. God wins!".... sigh

Seriously, this is always the same... the same mentality.

But this one is particularly impressive as it includes someone claiming to have prayed a drunk to sobriety and then let them drive home. Seriously impressive use of ignorance.

Might as well claim to have prayed us all to believe, if it was so pwerful.

kx12x
You quote Phage, then in the same post contradict him about us not being apes... Which is it?

Phage, like myself, knows exactly what I mean here and I would have no reason to contradict him. As I say, its all about common ancestors and the basic number one thing that Phage knows, and creationists dont, is that the phrase "we came from apes" is a telling sign that says "I dont understand evolution".

The phrase "we came from monkeys", is much the same and equally common.

kx12x
Actually In one of my previous posts I said prehistoric animal and I was using apes as an example. The whole point was about not knowing the what or who the "common ancestor" was exactly.

If it quacks like a duck, and so forth...
Creationists have, in my experience, a complete and total lack of understanding of the concept that the "ape"like creature of a common ancestor is not any of the modern apes that people see around us today. Furthermore, they also have the total lack of understanding that each and every one of the different kind of modern apes, has a different common ancestor. eg. common ancestor of humans and chimps is not the same as the common ancestor of humans and gibbons.

Thus, phrases like "the" (singular) common ancestor, and "came from apes" is the quacking of the creationist duck.

Grimpachi
Ok just WOW. I am wondering what these new science standards are. Maybe they list a few facts like dinosaurs and humans did not live at the same time. Does anyone think their lawsuit will hold up in court? Obviously some groups have a fear of science.

Not sure you can say dinosaurs and humans "never" crossed paths!!

The whole system is bunk, the textbooks and the sermons...

Cool web page showing all sorts of Dinosaurs in Carvings and art:
www.genesispark.com/exhibits/evidence/historical/ancient/dinosaur/
www.genesispark.com...

Dinosaucers Intro HD
www.youtube.com/watch?v=BT0cOBI9yD0

reply to post by BO XIAN

BO XIAN
e.g. A counseling client virtually falling down drunk that seriously sobered instantly when I prayed so. I'd not have allowed her to drive home, otherwise.

BO XIAN
When I got there, she WAS hopelessly drunk. I was angry. In my anger, I found myself praying quite forcefully and with full of conviction that she sober up immediately in the Name of Jesus.

She did and all the incredibly familiar results of being falling down drunk immediately disappeared.

I think this needs to be seriously addressed. Belief is all fine and good until it starts endangering peoples' lives.

The thing about appearing "sober" is that it doesn't necessarily mean "not drunk". People can appear to "sober up" due to many reasons... such as the psychological effect of having someone pray angrily over them.

Did you verify her blood alcohol level?

It sounds as if you are in a position of authority over this person, so you categorically should not have allowed her to drive while under the influence, and in a stressful state (she did call you for counseling at 2am)!

Since it was 2am in the morning, her natural circadian rhythms would have been in effect, meaning driving is dangerous, even without the addition of alcohol.

You could have got her killed... one micro-slip... a resurgence of the alcohol in the blood... I dread to think!

Please... next time... call a taxi... offer your couch... but don't allow an inebriated person to drive while still under the influence!

Very irresponsible!

You're lucky your god didn't have any nefarious plans for her that day.

Be careful with your "faith"... you have placed yourself in a position of authority, so peoples lives can depend on your advice.

No amount of praying will instantly remove alcohol from the blood.

reply to post by puzzlesphere


Your assumptions are showing.

No. I didn't have a handy way to check her blood alcohol level.

However, there are a dozen physiological, eye, behavioral cues that can be assessed.

She was sotted drunk one moment and stone cold sober the next. That's just a fact, whether your construction on reality allows for it, or not.

It was 35-40 years ago.

reply to post by winofiend


You weren't there either.

Your biases are showing.

reply to post by winofiend


As I suspected . . .

you were not interested in an example.

Evidently no example could pass your construction on reality.

Your biases are showing again.

reply to post by winofiend


BTW, it was in my internship. And my supervisor, the head of the center, was keenly aware of my assessment skills and was fine with what happened.