Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 124 (8774 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 07-22-2017 10:40 PM
383 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Tom Larkin
Upcoming Birthdays: anglagard
Post Volume:
Total: 814,414 Year: 19,020/21,208 Month: 1,779/3,111 Week: 574/707 Day: 38/112 Hour: 1/2

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
2
34567Next
Author Topic:   Evolution and the seven Christian hypothesis on Creation ought all be taught
saab93f
Member (Idle past 181 days)
Posts: 265
From: Finland
Joined: 12-17-2009


(1)
Message 16 of 100 (690261)
02-11-2013 10:58 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by SouthDakotaSkeptic
02-11-2013 10:01 AM


Actually I didn't think you were. I just saw the linguistic opportunity I could not miss

Welcome aboard anyway. Fortunately I do speak English.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by SouthDakotaSkeptic, posted 02-11-2013 10:01 AM SouthDakotaSkeptic has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by SouthDakotaSkeptic, posted 02-11-2013 11:59 PM saab93f has not yet responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3428
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006


(1)
Message 17 of 100 (690262)
02-11-2013 11:04 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by SouthDakotaSkeptic
02-11-2013 10:01 AM


En puhu suomi, olen amerikalainen

You don't have to be sorry for that. We're a pretty open minded group.

Welcome in, Fin.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by SouthDakotaSkeptic, posted 02-11-2013 10:01 AM SouthDakotaSkeptic has not yet responded

  
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 9726
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 3.0


(2)
Message 18 of 100 (690265)
02-11-2013 11:38 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by kofh2u
02-10-2013 12:58 PM


Just the sociological value of present ALL the seven views plus Evolution seems to be sensible behavior.

Seven plus One eh? Clever.

http://kofh2u.tripod....

Not biting on that troll bait. You are going to have to work a little harder to generate traffic to your web page.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison.

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by kofh2u, posted 02-10-2013 12:58 PM kofh2u has not yet responded

    
SouthDakotaSkeptic
Inactive Junior Member


(2)
Message 19 of 100 (690341)
02-11-2013 11:59 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by saab93f
02-11-2013 10:58 AM


No probs. For what it's worth, I'm a big fan of Saabs .
This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by saab93f, posted 02-11-2013 10:58 AM saab93f has not yet responded

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 1289 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 20 of 100 (690521)
02-13-2013 11:14 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by subbie
02-10-2013 2:45 PM


Of course, that is the only reason to teach any of those things, other than the Theory of Evolution. Certainly none of the others belongs in science class, except as examples of things that aren't science

What are your thoughts on the present policies wherein teachers and textbooks usually mention Alchemy and discuss that subject, teach the history of the early roots of Chemistry in that now rather discredited field of inquiry, and applaud and credit those alchemist with the invention and manufacture of almost all our present chemistry glassware.

The test tube, beckers, evaoprating vessels, and comolex tubings and coper and glass apparati were all created long before John Dalton:


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by subbie, posted 02-10-2013 2:45 PM subbie has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by subbie, posted 02-14-2013 12:00 AM kofh2u has responded

    
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 1289 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 21 of 100 (690522)
02-13-2013 11:25 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Dr Adequate
02-11-2013 1:07 AM


If it would have value for our sociological understanding, then maybe sociology class would be a good place for it.

On the downside, that would give scientifically illiterate sociology teachers apparent license to teach creationist crap, so maybe it's best not to.

You make a good point that these others missed, here, in that Social Science Class of Behavioral Science Classes do not have the excuse for ignoring the Bible creation tale the way Chemistry or Physics teachers might.

But the Biology teacher seems sort of trapped between the hard place of pretending the kids don't KNOW their is an issue with his science and that "rock of the Ages," scripture, which he must either condemn or apply these ideas of Theistic Evolution which ameliorates the controversy with a compromise.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-11-2013 1:07 AM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by subbie, posted 02-14-2013 12:03 AM kofh2u has not yet responded
 Message 25 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-14-2013 1:59 AM kofh2u has responded

    
subbie
Member (Idle past 176 days)
Posts: 3508
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 22 of 100 (690526)
02-14-2013 12:00 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by kofh2u
02-13-2013 11:14 PM


What are your thoughts on the present policies wherein teachers and textbooks usually mention Alchemy and discuss that subject, teach the history of the early roots of Chemistry in that now rather discredited field of inquiry, and applaud and credit those alchemist with the invention and manufacture of almost all our present chemistry glassware.

Since I'm not aware of exactly what is taught, I have no opinion on it. In the abstract, I'd have no problem teaching it as a part of the history of chemistry. Moreover, I'd have no problem teaching the history of the development of the ToE, including the fact that before Darwin, most naturalists were creationists of some sort.

Generally, I'm not opposed in principal to teaching anything that's accurate. Of course, there isn't time to teach it all, so priorities need to be set. But as long as what is taught is accurate, I'm good with it.


Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson

We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat

It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate

Howling about evidence is a conversation stopper, and it never stops to think if the claim could possibly be true -- foreveryoung


This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by kofh2u, posted 02-13-2013 11:14 PM kofh2u has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by kofh2u, posted 02-14-2013 1:09 AM subbie has responded

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 176 days)
Posts: 3508
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 23 of 100 (690527)
02-14-2013 12:03 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by kofh2u
02-13-2013 11:25 PM


But the Biology teacher seems sort of trapped between the hard place of pretending the kids don't KNOW their is an issue with his science....

The only problem with biology is religious nitwits who insist on lying to children about science to protect their goofy ideas. Eliminate that and you eliminate the problem.


Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson

We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat

It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate

Howling about evidence is a conversation stopper, and it never stops to think if the claim could possibly be true -- foreveryoung


This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by kofh2u, posted 02-13-2013 11:25 PM kofh2u has not yet responded

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 1289 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 24 of 100 (690535)
02-14-2013 1:09 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by subbie
02-14-2013 12:00 AM


I agree with that...

Moreover, I'd have no problem teaching the history of the development of the ToE, including the fact that before Darwin, most naturalists were creationists of some sort.

That makes sense in my book.

A curriculum designed to describe the history of the science related to cosmic evolution needs to be fair enough to emphasis that Genesis was the lone and sole claimant for a Big Bang in days when men puzzled over the possibility of a Static Universe that had always existed.

And genesis does observe that the Plant kingdom preceded the appearance of the Animal kingdom.

It also should be emphasized that Gen 1:9 noted correctly that once "all the waters under the heavens were gathered together into one place" called the Panthalassic Ocean, "and the dry land appeared," which was called Pangea.

It also is scientifically true that no visible light was present at the moment of the big bang beginning, but there was a delay of 400 million years, until the universe cooled down.
Then the First Cause said let there be light.

Whatever criticism the course might raise against the speculatins of the Bible writers, in all fairness, these few correct "hypothesis" did turn out to be true.

The only problem with biology is religious nitwits who insist on lying to children about science to protect their goofy ideas. Eliminate that and you eliminate the problem.

Edited by kofh2u, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by subbie, posted 02-14-2013 12:00 AM subbie has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by subbie, posted 02-14-2013 8:21 AM kofh2u has responded
 Message 30 by PaulK, posted 02-14-2013 2:02 PM kofh2u has responded
 Message 31 by Eli, posted 02-14-2013 8:18 PM kofh2u has responded

    
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15946
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 25 of 100 (690538)
02-14-2013 1:59 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by kofh2u
02-13-2013 11:25 PM


You make a good point that these others missed, here, in that Social Science Class of Behavioral Science Classes do not have the excuse for ignoring the Bible creation tale the way Chemistry or Physics teachers might.

But the Biology teacher seems sort of trapped between the hard place of pretending the kids don't KNOW their is an issue with his science and that "rock of the Ages," scripture, which he must either condemn or apply these ideas of Theistic Evolution which ameliorates the controversy with a compromise.

That didn't make much sense.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by kofh2u, posted 02-13-2013 11:25 PM kofh2u has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by kofh2u, posted 02-14-2013 8:41 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 176 days)
Posts: 3508
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 26 of 100 (690546)
02-14-2013 8:21 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by kofh2u
02-14-2013 1:09 AM


Re: I agree with that...
A curriculum designed to describe the history of the science related to cosmic evolution needs to be fair enough to emphasis that Genesis was the lone and sole claimant for a Big Bang in days when men puzzled over the possibility of a Static Universe that had always existed.

Actually, that kind of garbage is exactly what needs to be kept out. Nobody ever interpreted the bible to be describing the Big Bang theory until science developed it. The same is true for the rest of the codswallop you posted.

Pre-Darwin naturalists were actually men of science who tried to use a systematic method to find support for biblical creation in the natural world. Creationism fell by the wayside because there is no evidence for it and all the evidence points instead to the ToE.


Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson

We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat

It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate

Howling about evidence is a conversation stopper, and it never stops to think if the claim could possibly be true -- foreveryoung


This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by kofh2u, posted 02-14-2013 1:09 AM kofh2u has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by kofh2u, posted 02-14-2013 8:54 AM subbie has responded

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 1289 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 27 of 100 (690547)
02-14-2013 8:41 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by Dr Adequate
02-14-2013 1:59 AM



That didn't make much sense.

That paragraph addressed the fact that people complaining that Creationism ought not be a subject discussed in science classes forget that Social Science and Human Behavioral Science (Psychology) are also fields within science.

The assumption has been that the issue concerns biology only.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-14-2013 1:59 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by Larni, posted 02-18-2013 8:20 AM kofh2u has responded

    
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 1289 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 28 of 100 (690549)
02-14-2013 8:54 AM
Reply to: Message 26 by subbie
02-14-2013 8:21 AM


I disagree with that...

Actually, that kind of garbage is exactly what needs to be kept out. Nobody ever interpreted the bible to be describing the Big Bang theory until science developed it. The same is true for the rest of the codswallop you posted.

What I observe is that we ARE discussing it on every religious site and in the media, like we do here.
Bill Maher is ridiculing Americans very week, and the comedians are having a Field Day getting easy laughs from a one-side audience.

But no one is defending the sex prudence once recommended by the churches that were previously attended by everyone.
What I see is that the Family in America has been under attack simply because the Institution of Religion has been undermined.

RThe consequences have been that in the vacuum where education does not even discuss sexual morals and the impact on Welfare and poverty, our birth rate has become 50% bastards every year, and the development of a two tiered cultural institution that is seeing America "Coming Apart."

And though the destruction of Black America is the real issue, the effect has also divided white America.

COMING APART
The State of White America, 1960-2010
By Charles Murray


This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by subbie, posted 02-14-2013 8:21 AM subbie has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by subbie, posted 02-14-2013 9:28 AM kofh2u has not yet responded

    
subbie
Member (Idle past 176 days)
Posts: 3508
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 29 of 100 (690553)
02-14-2013 9:28 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by kofh2u
02-14-2013 8:54 AM


Re: I disagree with that...
Well, that's a nice list of non sequitors.

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson

We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat

It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate

Howling about evidence is a conversation stopper, and it never stops to think if the claim could possibly be true -- foreveryoung


This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by kofh2u, posted 02-14-2013 8:54 AM kofh2u has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 12866
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.4


(2)
Message 30 of 100 (690592)
02-14-2013 2:02 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by kofh2u
02-14-2013 1:09 AM


Re: I agree with that...
quote:

A curriculum designed to describe the history of the science related to cosmic evolution needs to be fair enough to emphasis that Genesis was the lone and sole claimant for a Big Bang in days when men puzzled over the possibility of a Static Universe that had always existed.

You have an odd idea of fairness. Perhaps we should rather mention the fact that Genesis starts with the primordial ocean, typical of Middle Eastern creation myths.

quote:

And genesis does observe that the Plant kingdom preceded the appearance of the Animal kingdom.

Which is hardly surprising.

quote:

It also should be emphasized that Gen 1:9 noted correctly that once "all the waters under the heavens were gathered together into one place" called the Panthalassic Ocean, "and the dry land appeared," which was called Pangea.

You mean INcorrectly. There was dry land before there were large bodies of water.

quote:

It also is scientifically true that no visible light was present at the moment of the big bang beginning, but there was a delay of 400 million years, until the universe cooled down.
Then the First Cause said let there be light.

Science says nothing about a First Cause acting AFTER the beginning of our universe to create light, in fact it says that there was no need for that at all. Never mind that your interpretation starts with the accretion disk that became the Earth already existing, which is much later!

quote:

Whatever criticism the course might raise against the speculatins of the Bible writers, in all fairness, these few correct "hypothesis" did turn out to be true.

Honesty compels me to point out that three out of four have NOT turned out to be true.

quote:

The only problem with biology is religious nitwits who insist on lying to children about science to protect their goofy ideas. Eliminate that and you eliminate the problem.

Then we're agreed that you're part of the problem.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by kofh2u, posted 02-14-2013 1:09 AM kofh2u has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by kofh2u, posted 02-15-2013 11:42 AM PaulK has responded

    
Prev1
2
34567Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017