Collarchat.com

Join Our Community
Collarchat.com

Home  Login  Search 

RE: Creationism in public schools


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Creationism in public schools Page: <<   < prev  17 18 [19] 20 21   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Creationism in public schools - 10/5/2008 9:00:35 PM   
Marion001


Posts: 54
Joined: 7/24/2008
Status: offline
why not have philosophy classes in high school? keep religion in its proper place...out of science classrooms.

(in reply to rulemylife)
Profile   Post #: 361
RE: Creationism in public schools - 10/5/2008 9:02:07 PM   
Marion001


Posts: 54
Joined: 7/24/2008
Status: offline
if we allow creationism, whats to stop intelligent design which is worst at least creationism doesnt pretend to be a science. or how about young earth? 6000 years old my foot. or the ever popular belief in the flying spaghetti monster and his noodle appendages. 

(in reply to Marion001)
Profile   Post #: 362
RE: Creationism in public schools - 10/5/2008 9:08:06 PM   
Daddysredhead


Posts: 23574
Joined: 11/6/2005
From: Northern (yet still part of the South) Virginia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

I love how this thread has turned out: from creationism to root vegetables. Et en passant par la pipe, en plus: tant va la pipe à la bouche que plus elle se fume. C'est BEAU. But LDRandastarte... you need a different online translation tool. Unless... perhaps you were making poetry  "à la Ron" ?


Tu me fais rire! 

_____________________________

Founding Member, Clan of the Scarlet O'Hair-a's

Do not challenge me to a battle of wits & come to fight unarmed.

Are you really that stupid? ~ Bless your heart

13th doughnut


(in reply to kittinSol)
Profile   Post #: 363
RE: Creationism in public schools - 10/5/2008 9:14:49 PM   
bipolarber


Posts: 2792
Joined: 9/25/2004
Status: offline
Marion,

Intelligent Design, and Creationisim are exactly the same thing.

Exactly.

During the court battle in (I think) Kansas over allowing it into the classrooms there, the folks defending REAL science found that the "ID" pamphlets were earlier "Creationist" pamphlets, only the two phrases had been swapped in their word processing program. All the other information about what the "theory" supposedly was, the "evidence" for it, and the people who supported it, were all exactly the same.

(in reply to Daddysredhead)
Profile   Post #: 364
RE: Creationism in public schools - 10/6/2008 3:48:10 AM   
StrangerThan


Posts: 1515
Joined: 4/25/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: brainiacsub

quote:

ORIGINAL: StrangerThan

[snip...]
The idiocy behind refusing to debate it or discuss it is the idiocy that always comes when people won't talk. It's kind of how you end up with groups of people hating each other because of color, because of beliefs, because they just live in a different place.

It's stupid. I see no reason it can't or shouldn't be debated. Taught? No. Debated? Absolutely.


Stranger, here is the problem. The Evangelical Christian right does not want the topic debated. For them, Creationism is a matter of fact and should be taught as such. They do not believe that Evolutionary Theory is a viable alternative to Creation as presented in Genesis. In fact, they do not believe in teaching anything that might discredit the Bible as anything but the infallible word of God. The ongoing discussions about teaching Creationism in public schools is a political debate, not  a theological one. What people don't realize is that the religious right has a very powerful agenda and an equally powerful lobby. They are politically savy enough to recognize that they must take small steps to achieve the ultimate goal - eliminate the teaching of evolution as science. A small step for them in this moment is to have Creationism 'debated' as an alternative to Evolutionary Theory. They are using the exact same political tactics to overturn Roe v. Wade - criminalize late-term abortions, require parental notification, eliminate public funding of abortions for the poor - because these are things that moderate Americans can agree on. The far right lobby has publicly admitted many times that this is part of an overall strategy to create precedence to overturn the existing abortion laws.

Now, back to the teaching of Creationism...the election of someone like Palin to a powerful political office is beyond the wildest masturbatory fantasies of the far right. Does Palin actually believe that the Earth is 6,000 yrs old, that dinosaurs co-existed with man, that evolution is junk science? I don't believe that she is that stupid. After all, where does she think all the oil in Alaska came from? She must have some understanding of the science of oil...but I could be wrong. But she is exactly the vehicle that the far right lobby needs to further their agenda, because I believe she is too stupid to recognize that she is being used.

I find all this discussion about the science, theology and philosophy of Evolution vs Creationism to be quite fascinating. I have enjoyed reading this thread, but too many have retreated to their own corner rather than step out of the ring and watch the bigger fight. Everyone loses if the lobbists win this one.


I understand the problem brainiac, probably better than a lot of folks because I was raised in a fundamentalist household. I understand the lobby, sway these folks have, and the intent behind a lot of their actions. The first 12 years of life were immersed in it. It took about 20 more years to come to terms with myself. The pivotal event came during a time when I was an outdoors reporter and used to cranking out articles, editorials and short stories every week. It started with a dream I had - one you'd almost classify as a nightmare except there was nothing truly horrific about it, just a deep sense of something being unsettled and not quite right. I started writing it as a story and ended up chronicling a good portion of my own childhood. The process of writing it shed a lot of light and clarity on who Stranger actually was and probably more importantly, why he was who he was... if that makes sense. Grin.

Folks often take divergent paths when reaching that kind of realization. Some attempt to divest themselves completely from the indoctrination those early years contained. Others continue to exist in that duality where they put the teachings on one side, what they perceive as reality on the other side and rarely let the two mix because they can't rationally explain belief in the face of science. Some fall back to those early years and carry all kinds of emotionally and mentally destructive burdens with them thereafter - things like guilt, being ashamed of who or what they are, of seeing themselves as somehow broken because they can't live up to what they were taught and be human at the same time. Some outright rebel, and some of those end up doing things they later regret without realizing the root cause of it.

I'm not a psychologist, nor do I have all the answers. I'm sure if I did some research I'd find reams and reams of material on the emotional and mental ramifications and complications that can present themselves later in life. I just know that for me, I reached a type of equilibrium that brought my own sense of peace. One aspect of that is that I was damned tired of people telling me what to think, what to believe, what to feel. I'm one of those people who don't see this in black and white terms. After all, one of my questions to those who are so adamant about evolution being wrong is that, if God was intelligent enough to create life, wouldn't he be intelligent enough to give it the ability to survive in the face of changing environmental pressures, to adapt, to... evolve? The issues are really only clouded if one stands on either side of the spectrum and insists that side is the one and only truth. Die hard creationists and evolutionists both do it to the nth degree while at best ignoring the other, at worst attempting to denounce the other. I'm shrugging here but it's only if you insist on a literal translation of things that there is a problem assimilating both as possible. The bottom line though is that no one can state categorically what the truth is. If they could, there would be no debate.

I've been around enough to know that science itself evolves, that what we know or suspect we know in terms of the past and present can and most likely will change. Every discovery sheds new light, and sometimes that light illuminates shadows in the picture that we thought we'd already understood. I see this process as linear, sort of like putting together a puzzle and seeing more and more of the picture with each new piece that falls into place. And that puzzle is monsterous. Hell, we can't even say for certain what happened a thousand years ago in many cases. Find a fragment of text and someone will spend a lifetime trying to ascertain it's validity. What I see on both sides is a deserpate need to be right, and in that context, I see a fragment of jaw bone given life with actions and habits that are often simply supposition on one hand, while creationists scramble to find holes in anything that casts doubt on their literal interpretations on the other.

Whether or not one side will eventually be proven right is beyond the point. The point is, what Stranger has come to accept internally, and that is that there is no reason there can't be truth on both sides. Boil that down to the basics and essentially it means at some point something occurred that led to us ending up on top of the food chain in the present day. Evolution is a fact in that time line. I'm comfortable in the fact that I don't know the exact path or the exact forces that created that path. I'm also comfortable nailing either side to the wall who states categorically that this happened or that happened when all either side has when it comes to that moment in time is faith in their own understanding.

Where that leads in terms of debate is this, if you sequester it, bury it, refuse to allow it, all you really do is allow both camps to squat on their territory and scream insults at the other. The only folks who migrate back and forth between those camps are the folks who have enough internal insight to understand the position of both. If you're going to change minds, or find some common ground where both can exist, the only way to do that is bring both sides to the table and find that common ground. Anyone who thinks that doesn't have to happen hasn't been paying attention in the last 2-3 decades. There is sufficient force in the fundamentalist movement to change your life regardless of whether or not you want it changed. That's a big part of the fear with this election. You're not going to stop that by sitting in one camp yelling insults across the river at the other side.

I'm not about telling either side they're wrong because I personally found a way to assimilate truth in both. What I am about is painting the extremists for what they are. The elitists exist on both sides and are part of the problem, not the answer.

(in reply to brainiacsub)
Profile   Post #: 365
RE: Creationism in public schools - 10/6/2008 6:15:05 AM   
UncleNasty


Posts: 1108
Joined: 3/20/2004
Status: offline
I live only an hour away from the "Creation Museum." Out of curiosity I have been and seen what they offer.

It is a scary place.

Google "answers in genesis" to find out more about it.

Uncle Nasty

(in reply to Roselaure)
Profile   Post #: 366
RE: Creationism in public schools - 10/6/2008 6:23:01 AM   
thishereboi


Posts: 14463
Joined: 6/19/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bipolarber

Thishereboi,

I never said anything about their being christians, boi... I said that scientists don't believe in creationisim. There's a major difference. Seeks is trying to say that scientists somehow secretly believe in this rubbish, in a total turnaround to the basis of their professional lives. He offered no proof of this outlandish claim, so I can only assume that he wasn't telling the truth.

Now you, jumping in with both feet, have made the mistake of assuming I meant that none of them are christians. Obviously, there are very religious scientists. Einstien and Bhor, for examples. But they made the distinction between what they themselves believe, and what they can prove, via experiment and mathmatics. They understood that religion isn't something you push on kids in a science classroom.

Now, I ask again...

Who are some of these "scientists" who support this creationsim bullshit? Name them. Find links to both their credentials, and their statements that they believe that I.D. is every bit as valid as Darwin.


So your saying that there are christian scientists, but none of them believe in creationism? Yea right. And you know this because you have talked to every scientist and they have explained their religous beliefs to you? Or maybe your just mental like that and you automatically know the beliefs of every scientist in the world. Not sure, but I do know you will continue to spout the bs like it's gospel because if someone reads it enough times. maybe they will assume it's true.

As to looking up links for you, naw, do your own homework. Maybe you will learn something.

_____________________________

"Sweetie, you're wasting your gum" .. Albert


This here is the boi formerly known as orfunboi


(in reply to bipolarber)
Profile   Post #: 367
RE: Creationism in public schools - 10/6/2008 6:30:15 AM   
thishereboi


Posts: 14463
Joined: 6/19/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bipolarber

Marion,

Intelligent Design, and Creationisim are exactly the same thing.

Exactly.

During the court battle in (I think) Kansas over allowing it into the classrooms there, the folks defending REAL science found that the "ID" pamphlets were earlier "Creationist" pamphlets, only the two phrases had been swapped in their word processing program. All the other information about what the "theory" supposedly was, the "evidence" for it, and the people who supported it, were all exactly the same.


Yes and Ben Stien just made a movie about that a while ago.

Kinda of odd though....if it's true that there are NO scientists that believe in creationism, where did Ben get all those scientists for his movie?

_____________________________

"Sweetie, you're wasting your gum" .. Albert


This here is the boi formerly known as orfunboi


(in reply to bipolarber)
Profile   Post #: 368
RE: Creationism in public schools - 10/6/2008 6:39:07 AM   
kittinSol


Posts: 16926
Status: offline
Do you think creationism should be taught in public schools as if it were a valid scientific theory?

_____________________________



(in reply to thishereboi)
Profile   Post #: 369
RE: Creationism in public schools - 10/6/2008 6:45:20 AM   
meatcleaver


Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: bipolarber

Marion,

Intelligent Design, and Creationisim are exactly the same thing.

Exactly.

During the court battle in (I think) Kansas over allowing it into the classrooms there, the folks defending REAL science found that the "ID" pamphlets were earlier "Creationist" pamphlets, only the two phrases had been swapped in their word processing program. All the other information about what the "theory" supposedly was, the "evidence" for it, and the people who supported it, were all exactly the same.


Yes and Ben Stien just made a movie about that a while ago.

Kinda of odd though....if it's true that there are NO scientists that believe in creationism, where did Ben get all those scientists for his movie?


You do know creationists are an embarrassment to America.

A scientist who blieves in creationism isn't a scientist and that's a fact!

_____________________________

There are fascists who consider themselves humanitarians, like cannibals on a health kick, eating only vegetarians.

(in reply to thishereboi)
Profile   Post #: 370
RE: Creationism in public schools - 10/6/2008 8:13:12 AM   
Marion001


Posts: 54
Joined: 7/24/2008
Status: offline
ID is a spiffed up failure at trying to say that because the world is complex and there are blanks in the evolution theory it clearly shows gods hand. so...because viruses are extremly complex and difficult to understand we should wait for the hand of god to control his own work and cure it by himself because as lesser beings we have no reason to question why our God created the virus because it is above our head and we dont have the right to question our master.

this is the basis of the ID belief. scary isnt it?

so give support to the FSM!

also the text book that the ID's are trying to push "Of Panda's and People" was clearly altered before publication from Creationism to Intelligent Design.

(in reply to meatcleaver)
Profile   Post #: 371
RE: Creationism in public schools - 10/6/2008 8:24:36 AM   
brainiacsub


Posts: 1209
Joined: 11/11/2007
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: UncleNasty

I live only an hour away from the "Creation Museum." Out of curiosity I have been and seen what they offer.

It is a scary place.

Google "answers in genesis" to find out more about it.

Uncle Nasty


Is this the same Creation Museum that Bill Maher is always lampooning? The one with an exhibit of a man riding a dinosaur like a horse?

(in reply to UncleNasty)
Profile   Post #: 372
RE: Creationism in public schools - 10/6/2008 8:25:58 AM   
MadAxeman


Posts: 4171
Joined: 8/28/2008
From: UK
Status: offline
Creationism is based on faith not philosophy. It does not welcome debate or analysis. I would say that's enough to disqualify it from schools.

_____________________________

Hitman for the Subby Mafia

(in reply to Marion001)
Profile   Post #: 373
RE: Creationism in public schools - 10/6/2008 8:54:08 AM   
Dnomyar


Posts: 7933
Joined: 6/27/2005
Status: offline
There was no God until he was invented by the Jews. What about all of the Gods before him.
There was no God in other countries of the world before it was forced upon them. If you were to have religion in schools. Whose religion would it be? Whose God would it be? What about the people who belive it is all crap. Would you have them stand in the corner for their belief.

(in reply to rulemylife)
Profile   Post #: 374
RE: Creationism in public schools - 10/6/2008 9:07:45 AM   
LadyEllen


Posts: 10931
Joined: 6/30/2006
From: Stourport-England
Status: offline
It might be interesting to have classes looking at who are we, how did we get here and why etc, using no science based evidence just observation and thought, and no religious influence to how it proceeded.

Problem being, it wouldnt be possible to so so free of scientific or religious influences, since both are so heavily embedded into the cultural framework, even as far as informing the language we might use to hold such a class.

E



_____________________________

In a test against the leading brand, 9 out of 10 participants couldnt tell the difference. Dumbasses.

(in reply to Dnomyar)
Profile   Post #: 375
RE: Creationism in public schools - 10/6/2008 9:11:41 AM   
kittinSol


Posts: 16926
Status: offline
My final year at high school, philosopy was a huge part of the curriculum: six hours a week.

_____________________________



(in reply to LadyEllen)
Profile   Post #: 376
RE: Creationism in public schools - 10/6/2008 9:11:59 AM   
meatcleaver


Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline
We like to think we are an intelligent species yet we still argue about whether a tribal staoneage god exists or not and whether he creates the universe or not.

Lord preserve us! We deserve to be destroyed by fire and brimstone for giving half a second's serious thought to such nonsense.

_____________________________

There are fascists who consider themselves humanitarians, like cannibals on a health kick, eating only vegetarians.

(in reply to LadyEllen)
Profile   Post #: 377
RE: Creationism in public schools - 10/6/2008 9:24:21 AM   
LadyEllen


Posts: 10931
Joined: 6/30/2006
From: Stourport-England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

My final year at high school, philosopy was a huge part of the curriculum: six hours a week.


Lucky. My final year at high school, avoiding becoming the victim of assault or theft was the bulk of what we'd learned.

And yes, we did sleep in a paper bag in a puddle, twenty to a bed...

E

_____________________________

In a test against the leading brand, 9 out of 10 participants couldnt tell the difference. Dumbasses.

(in reply to kittinSol)
Profile   Post #: 378
RE: Creationism in public schools - 10/6/2008 10:29:21 AM   
bipolarber


Posts: 2792
Joined: 9/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: UncleNasty

I live only an hour away from the "Creation Museum." Out of curiosity I have been and seen what they offer.

It is a scary place.

Google "answers in genesis" to find out more about it.

Uncle Nasty


Or go see Religulos.(sp?) Bill Mahr spends a chunk of his movie there... the saddle on the baby triceratops just said volumes...LOL  (Apperantly, these folks think "Dinotopia" was reality...)

(in reply to UncleNasty)
Profile   Post #: 379
RE: Creationism in public schools - 10/6/2008 10:31:19 AM   
philosophy


Posts: 5284
Joined: 2/15/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen

And yes, we did sleep in a paper bag in a puddle, twenty to a bed...



...luxury!

(in reply to LadyEllen)
Profile   Post #: 380
Page:   <<   < prev  17 18 [19] 20 21   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Creationism in public schools Page: <<   < prev  17 18 [19] 20 21   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2024
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.381