It doesn't matter who made the scientist. It only matters how well he/she is educated. The topic is about how Europe doesn't seem to let notions about God hamper scientific education.
As I've shown here fairness in balance makes for overall good science in Europe, America and around the world. Onesidedness tends toward censorship and ignorance. The Biblical model is not a hindrance. It's an alternative science which has certain merits and offers alternative possibilities/hypotheses.
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
We seem to have lost peracutus but it appears that he's informing us about how he sees it in Europe compared to America and is interested in our responses. BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
Onesidedness tends toward censorship and ignorance.
We're talking about onlysidedness, though. If creationists were honest, they'd roll out their curriculum. It can't be censored before you even present it. There are plenty of threads here for you to do so.
Disclaimer: The above statement is without a doubt, the most LUDICROUS, IDIOTIC AND PERFECT EXAMPLE OF WILLFUL STUPIDITY, THAT I HAVE EVER SEEN OR HEARD.
quote:Onesidedness tends toward censorship and ignorance. The Biblical model is not a hindrance. It's an alternative science which has certain merits and offers alternative possibilities/hypotheses.
ID should be taught in the US.
It wouldn't take much time either. Essentially a teacher would simply say to the class: "The model of Intelligent design revolves around the concept that if we don't know, God was therefore responsible."
And then the teacher would go back to what they were doing.
As for Creationism, it should be taught in religion class, where it as the same amount of evidence and validity as other religions. But creationists tend to get their proverbial panties in knots when their beliefs are placed next to other evidence free beliefs. Most forums I've been on where a religion's origin vs literal creationism thread is started rarely see any creationist traffic on that thread. But that's not surprising as Creationism can only fallaciously find validity in false dichotomies. Even here the thread about evidence for creationism is very, very, scares on actual evidence for.
Would you support the teaching of a idea which bases its truth off of the invalidity of another?
Think of it this way, assume there are 26 possible answers to a philosophy question. Someone argues that answer B is wrong, therefore answer A is automatically correct because B is wrong. They ignore that 24 other answers exist. Would you want your kids to learn that kind of reasoning? That where many answers exist, that only 2 exist and only one exists because the other is false?
There is a cultural gulf here - you are saying that bibical models should be taught to provide balance, that there is merit to the ideas of creationism/Intelligence design. We, from europe is saying that there is nothing to balance, we start from a position that both concepts have no merit. Well actually we don't even start from there, both concepts are so discredited, we don't even discuss anymore if they should be discussed.
If your belief was true, you'd be able to argue it. Instead of you simply refuse to even address the minority of points made against your arguments and often fall back on a sentiment that you and your beliefs are victims of society.
Thank you for sharing your observations, Zucadragon.
Americans have a tendency to think of themselves at the extreme: either the best or the worst in the world. It's cultural narcissism born of geographical isolation. The result is a cultural self-image distorted by the classic Virgin-Whore dichotomy. In thinking their society the embodiment of good in the world or the embodiment of evil, Americans tend to assume that others think the same way. It never occurs to them that in any respect the rest of the world might view them as merely ordinary.
In support of your observations, here are a few BBC stories about creationism as an issue in UK education. The articles carry links that can take anyone further who wants to explore this.
A complicating factor for educators in Europe is the presence in many countries of Muslims as a large minority. Muslims have their own biblical literalists. Like other biblical literalists, they tend to be YECs who misunderstand and distrust science.
There's another reason Europeans don't laugh as hard as the author of our OP imagines: they know the history. If the New World is disproportionately populated today by people who take religion very, very seriously, it is because European monarchs once took it seriously enough to imprison and kill their ancestors for theirs.
There's another reason Europeans don't laugh as hard as the author of our OP imagines: they know the history. If the New World is disproportionately populated today by people who take religion very, very seriously, it is because European kings and queens once took religion seriously enough to imprison and kill their ancestors for theirs.
Yes, a point I was going to bring up myself to some extent. :)
Here is my take:
To elaborate regarding the history of the US relative to Europe, I think the result of not having a state religion or a uniform religion purged of dissenters (think Inquisition or the Huguenots) is that every take on religion, no matter how wacky it may appear to outsiders, often found fertile ground in the US. It is no mistake that Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Christian Scientists, and Seventh Day Adventists all started here instead of Europe.
As to the idea of modern creation 'science,' virtually all roots go back to the Millerites, who spawned many of the US home-grown denominations. Despite continuous failure in predicting the exact date of the end of the world, the leaders and adherents always came up with excuses for the failure of their prophecies, even to the point where they became experts at denial and delusion.
Having repeatedly failed at the end-time stuff and evidently tired of being on the defensive, they decided to attack 'modernity' of which science is a part. Populist concerns with having to adapt from a simple independent farm-based economy to an industrial one caused much anxiety which found a relief in adherence to over-simplistic and anti-intellectual 'old-time-religion.'
One small problem with lacking a deep history or ancient culture is that it allows too much respectability to being anti-intellectual as witnessed by our play-stupid politicians. It's like "vote for me because I am as ignorant as you are."
Ask Agnew, Reagan, Bush, or Huckabee for further details.
But I digress. I say scratch a YEC deep enough and in all likelihood you will find a Millerite
Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis Bacon
The more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza