|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,890 Year: 4,147/9,624 Month: 1,018/974 Week: 345/286 Day: 1/65 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Intelligent Design in Science Class - Sample curriculum please | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coragyps Member (Idle past 763 days) Posts: 5553 From: Snyder, Texas, USA Joined: |
Text books are now available. But, they are all based on creation. All that they have to do is to eliminate any mention of the Creator and make changes based only based on Science. That would be simplest if they'd remove all the pages from those creto "texts" and put some new pages with factual information in, but I don't think bookbinders work that way. What you're suggesting is precisely what the fine folks behind Of Pandas and People did, and it deservedly was shot down in flames in the court decision at Dover, PA. Changing the names ("God" to "the Designer", for instance) in an intellectually bankrupt text doesn't lessen the bankruptccy in the least.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
The introduction of ID is only to challenge the icons of evolution. Why? What about evolution makes it a such a target? What part is not compatable with some derivation of ID?
The next step for us is to introduce ID. You need to start from first principles and see where the conclusions go, rather than taking conclusions as given or adapting any kind of creationism.
Then, the debate will have some life. First let's address both sides of the design debate, and see where that leads us. See http://EvC Forum: Silly Design Institute: Let's discuss BOTH sides of the Design Controversy...for more information. Enjoy. we are limited in our ability to understand by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Quetzal Member (Idle past 5900 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
Believe it or not, about three and a half years ago this topic came up. A poster named Tranquility Base came up with the best ID/Creationist syllabus that I've seen. Check out the discussion at A Request for Tranquility Base and let me know what you think.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
inkorrekt Member (Idle past 6110 days) Posts: 382 From: Westminster,CO, USA Joined: |
We can debate whether evolution OR Creation occured. The bottom line is our Students are not learning good science at all.This is the destiny of all our controversies. Instead of telling our students, this is how it occured, we must be honest enough to state that at this time, we can only speculate about the origins of life till a definite proof is established. That will only be fair and reasonable. Today, in our society Science has been politicalized just as AIDS, abortion, marriage, war etc.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Quetzal Member (Idle past 5900 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
It might be useful if you were to comment on the linked post/thread, rather than engage in yet another incomprehensible and incohate rant. Thanks.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
inkorrekt Member (Idle past 6110 days) Posts: 382 From: Westminster,CO, USA Joined: |
Creation is based on supernaturalism. But not ID.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
inkorrekt Member (Idle past 6110 days) Posts: 382 From: Westminster,CO, USA Joined: |
If Science had not been politicalized, we did not have to have these forum at all.I do not understand why you are so upset when I mentioned all these politically Correct/ incorrect issues that are destroying our society. Much of the evils in our society are due to our belief systems. What we belive will determine our lifestyles. This is where we are. So, what I wrote is very very relevant for today.Just because you disagree does not mean that these problems do not exist.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Quetzal Member (Idle past 5900 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
Yes. All very nice. However, your (now) two rants have absolutely nothing to do with the topic. Try again.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 640 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
What is it based on?
What predictions can it make? What testable statement, if proven true, falsifies ID. What explainatory power does it have?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coragyps Member (Idle past 763 days) Posts: 5553 From: Snyder, Texas, USA Joined: |
Creation is based on supernaturalism. But not ID. Then who, pray tell, is this Designer? If she's an Altairian computer programmer, who designed life on her planet? What other than the supernatural could ID be based on, if intelligence must be intelligently designed?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1283 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
Instead of telling our students, this is how it occured, we must be honest enough to state that at this time, we can only speculate about the origins of life till a definite proof is established. I'm pretty sure that's exactly what schools are doing. I'm not aware of any school curriculum that is teaching students that there is a generally accepted scientific explanation for the origin of life. You keep conflating two different questions: how did life being? and how has life developed? Biology and the ToE are all about the second question. But you think it advances your political agenda to continue to insist that the two are intertwined. Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
EZscience Member (Idle past 5182 days) Posts: 961 From: A wheatfield in Kansas Joined: |
inkorrekt writes: Today, in our society Science has been politicalized Actually, the word you seek is 'politicized'.And it is the proponents of ID that are trying to make science/evolution a political (and judicial) issue. Just like the Kansas School board redefining science to cater to their Christian Right supporters. Now THAT is the politicization of science. Those who would politicize science are doing so for political advantage. They seek to capitalize on widespread public ignorance for their own benefit. Don't blame science itself for this. How many scientists do you see running for office?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
inkorrekt Member (Idle past 6110 days) Posts: 382 From: Westminster,CO, USA Joined: |
What is it based on? Any new information needs creativity. How do you define creativity?
"What predictions can it make?" Prediction is somthing the scientists do. ID only offers an alternative explanation for the origin of life processes. "What testable statement, if proven true, falsifies ID".This is mute question. "What explainatory power does it have?" What are the various components involved in any invention and the processes involved in them.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
Prediction is somthing the scientists do. ID only offers an alternative explanation for the origin of life processes. So...ID isn't science then? Why would we teach it in a science class if it isn't science?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
sidelined Member (Idle past 5936 days) Posts: 3435 From: Edmonton Alberta Canada Joined: |
inkorrekt
Creation is based on supernaturalism. But not ID. Oh,Really? Let us study the implications posed by intelligent design. Intelligent design states that the world has levels of complexity in it than cannot have arisen with being directed and that this direction is imposed by an intelligent designer. You have stated that supernaturalism is not the same as Intelligent design so ,therefore, God is out of the picture as the intelligent designer. Now the question arises that since an entity, as loosely defined here, needs be more complex than that which the entity designs, we ask the question what is the source of the complexity of the intelligent designer whose existence we derived to explain the complexity of the world?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024