Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,821 Year: 3,078/9,624 Month: 923/1,588 Week: 106/223 Day: 4/13 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   20 years of the Creation/ID science curriculum
Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 59 of 305 (453570)
02-03-2008 8:09 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by Tanypteryx
01-30-2008 3:40 PM


Re: Aims determine 20 year destination
Tanypteryx writes:
Randman claims that introducing ID into science classes would lead to students developing better critical thinking skills. If he is right, once they apply those newly gained skills to the silly idea that ID is science, they will reject it completely.
If they will reject them conpletely what's the point fo wasting the time in class? Surely that time could be better spent on teaching subjects that will not be rejected because they are obviously only valid if you beleive.
The school of the future would have at least a year devoted to fairies, astrology, tarot, ID etc; just so the eager student can reject them complelty

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Tanypteryx, posted 01-30-2008 3:40 PM Tanypteryx has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by Beretta, posted 02-06-2008 1:12 AM Larni has replied

Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 94 of 305 (454280)
02-06-2008 9:01 AM
Reply to: Message 80 by Beretta
02-06-2008 1:12 AM


Re: Aims determine 20 year destination
Baretta writes:
That's just dumb of course -silly comparison -we would only teach those things that have some scientific backing ok?
This is where u phail: ID has no scientific background. Scientist agree, the Courts in the US agree, the government of the UK agree.
The only people who disagree are religious.
So, as you say. I.D. (with no scientific background) should not be taught out side of church.
This is now a PRATT: end of story.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by Beretta, posted 02-06-2008 1:12 AM Beretta has not replied

Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 102 of 305 (454317)
02-06-2008 10:37 AM
Reply to: Message 101 by Beretta
02-06-2008 10:26 AM


Re: Ignorant crap
Care to elaborate on the scientific background you claim I.D. has?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by Beretta, posted 02-06-2008 10:26 AM Beretta has not replied

Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 134 of 305 (454451)
02-07-2008 4:16 AM
Reply to: Message 132 by Cold Foreign Object
02-06-2008 11:30 PM


Re: Paging a creationist moderator...
Hi Ray. Don't you think that the US (I assume your are from the US based on your oppinions) will fall terribly far behind the more scientifically oriented countries such as those in Europe and the Commonwealth, China and Japan?
We do know that the scientific method that has up until now been very good to the US will no longer operate if the protocols that conclude the ToE are removed.
Does this not imply quite strongly that the pace of discovery in the US will decline? Can we not model the future of the US on countries where the present day pace of scientific discovery is retarded by religious parameters?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 02-06-2008 11:30 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 145 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 02-07-2008 2:16 PM Larni has replied

Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 136 of 305 (454458)
02-07-2008 7:03 AM
Reply to: Message 135 by Trixie
02-07-2008 6:18 AM


Re: Paging a creationist moderator...
Hi Trixie. I can't get the link to work and I would love to read it. Please could you send it to me?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 135 by Trixie, posted 02-07-2008 6:18 AM Trixie has not replied

Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 140 of 305 (454505)
02-07-2008 11:49 AM
Reply to: Message 135 by Trixie
02-07-2008 6:18 AM


Re: Paging a creationist moderator...
Oh that was fantastic! Now I finaly have some insight into what Ray has been promising for so long.
Nice to know that the creo admins think it's a pile of junk.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 135 by Trixie, posted 02-07-2008 6:18 AM Trixie has not replied

Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 182 of 305 (454643)
02-08-2008 2:46 AM
Reply to: Message 145 by Cold Foreign Object
02-07-2008 2:16 PM


Re: Paging a creationist moderator...
Ray writes:
You are ignorant.
LOL, Ray. I see you respond to me the same way you respond to the creo wiki guys who bent over backwards to help you on you 'fantastic paper to rock the foundations of evolution (not in press )'. i.e. getting cross and calling them ignorant or "intellectual midgets".
You are such a card, Ray.
You know, I bet Gene Scott is having a right old laugh at your silly antics (if he knew who you were).
Edited by Larni, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 145 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 02-07-2008 2:16 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 227 of 305 (455363)
02-12-2008 5:24 AM
Reply to: Message 221 by CTD
02-11-2008 11:44 PM


CTD writes:
Experiment - check
Observation - check
analysis - check
Um...none of this is actually true, is it?
What eperiment/Observation has lent support to ID?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 221 by CTD, posted 02-11-2008 11:44 PM CTD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 260 by CTD, posted 02-13-2008 3:36 PM Larni has replied

Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 279 of 305 (455851)
02-14-2008 7:44 AM
Reply to: Message 260 by CTD
02-13-2008 3:36 PM


Re: You kidder
CTD writes:
There's been plenty of work done verifying the self-evident fact that randomness does not produce complexity.
Then pony it up or get out of dodge.
Edited by Larni, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 260 by CTD, posted 02-13-2008 3:36 PM CTD has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024