Why should evolution be taught in public schools? (Another class project type topic)

Double space, wide margins and lots of illustrations.

---

Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!

I almost thought to recommend placing one word on each page...
GOD
DID
IT.

---

h
"Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split, as a general thing." - Robert E. Howard

I wonder if Dani is envious of the chump who got the topic: "George Bush is the greatest leader in the history of the Free World?"

---

If it's truly good and powerful, it deserves to engender a thousand misunderstandings. -- Ben Ratcliffe

In Kent Hovind's seminar tape #4 at 0:42:55 :

quote:

---

75% of all children raised in Christian homes who attend public schools will reject the Christian faith by their first year of college.
(video, "Let My Children Go" by Caryl Matritiano, VP Jeremiah Films, 800-828-2290, Access denied)

---

The videos on that site are all Religious Right stuff. My impression of Hovind's interpretation and my assumption of that film's treatment of that statistic is that public schools are hostile to Christianity.However, my interpretation, which is also based on several testimonials by ex-Christians and ex-creationists, is that that loss of faith results from the kids finally discovering that their parents and religious leaders had been lying to them their entire life. Most of the atheist testimonials that I've read or heard involved having been betrayed or lied to by their religion or religious leaders.As one ex-creationist and self-described former "creation science" addict, Ed, described it (NO REDIRECT):

quote:

---

One day, being psyched-up for a new fix, I popped in a video I had received from a young man at Church. The tape was a series of debates (about eight), between a famous "young-earther" and various evolutionists. After viewing them, I found my jaw on the floor. I truly expected these evolutionists to roll over and die after being presented with this battering of "facts" - they didn't! I was truly numbed and frankly, pretty upset with the manners of this "young-earther." I was forced to come to some serious conclusions that day.

​

1. Scientists have answers for each point raised, e.g., shrinking sun, polystrate fossils etc., they were not surprised at all!

​

2. Creation Science is not science. I watched as this creationist fellow was repeatedly being cornered, relying on miracle after miracle to answer their questions. Yes, God can and does perform miracles, but these were miracles that were not even in the Bible - that's not science!

​

3. I have been a hypocrite! My favorite reasoning with skeptics is to challenge them to examine both sides of an issue before reaching their conclusions. "How can we dialogue fairly if we only have one point of view?" I would ask. But I have NEVER given an evolutionist nor an old earth creationist the opportunity to present their case!

​

I talked to my pastor (a young-earther), about my new discoveries. He warned me as so many other "creationists" have, that to continue on this path was dangerous and would only lead to me falling away from the faith. At times, that notion seemed true! He asked me, "do you want to end up like "R" (a college student) who now denies the faith after he tried to pursue scientific understanding?" That question hit me hard and weighed heavy on my heart; however, I would soon discover that that line of reasoning was also imaginary. Since then, I have corresponded with several Christians who have traveled the same path as I have. One thing that is always agreed upon is the damage young-earth creationism can do to souls; how many believers they have seen fall away. We have been taught that the Bible demands a young earth interpretation and when the facts of nature become inescapable - our faith becomes shattered! My pastor was wrong, and the opposite was the case. If "R" had been offered an alternative from the beginning, he would never have experienced the turmoil he went through. When "R" could no longer deny that the universe was billions of years old, the only option left for him was to deny the Bible. How many others have been disheartened in a like manner?

---

BTW, later in an email Ed mentioned that that young-earther on the tape was Kent Hovind.

---

{When you search for God, y}ou can't go to the people who believe already. They've made up their minds and want to convince you of their own personal heresy.
("The Jehovah Contract", AKA "Der Jehova-Vertrag", by Viktor Koman, 1984)Humans wrote the Bible; God wrote the world.
(from filk song "Word of God" by Dr. Catherine Faber, No webpage found at provided URL: http://www.echoschildren.org/CDlyrics/WORDGOD.HTML)Of course, if Dr. Mortimer's surmise should be correct and we are dealing with forces outside the ordinary laws of Nature, there is an end of our investigation. But we are bound to exhaust all other hypotheses before falling back upon this one.
(Sherlock Holmes in The Hound of the Baskervilles)Gentry's case depends upon his halos remaining a mystery. Once a naturalistic explanation is discovered, his claim of a supernatural origin is washed up. So he will not give aid or support to suggestions that might resolve the mystery. Science works toward an increase in knowledge; creationism depends upon a lack of it. Science promotes the open-ended search; creationism supports giving up and looking no further. It is clear which method Gentry advocates.
("Gentry's Tiny Mystery -- Unsupported by Geology" by J. Richard Wakefield, Creation/Evolution Issue XXII, Winter 1987-1988, pp 31-32)

One thing that concerns me is that such essays have traditionally been part of a creationist-run "balanced-treatment" class. I have to wonder if that's what's happening to Dani.Though it's more likely that "intelligent design" is the term used.Could be a legit project meant to get that out of the way. But still I have to wonder.

---

{When you search for God, y}ou can't go to the people who believe already. They've made up their minds and want to convince you of their own personal heresy.
("The Jehovah Contract", AKA "Der Jehova-Vertrag", by Viktor Koman, 1984)Humans wrote the Bible; God wrote the world.
(from filk song "Word of God" by Dr. Catherine Faber, No webpage found at provided URL: http://www.echoschildren.org/CDlyrics/WORDGOD.HTML)Of course, if Dr. Mortimer's surmise should be correct and we are dealing with forces outside the ordinary laws of Nature, there is an end of our investigation. But we are bound to exhaust all other hypotheses before falling back upon this one.
(Sherlock Holmes in The Hound of the Baskervilles)Gentry's case depends upon his halos remaining a mystery. Once a naturalistic explanation is discovered, his claim of a supernatural origin is washed up. So he will not give aid or support to suggestions that might resolve the mystery. Science works toward an increase in knowledge; creationism depends upon a lack of it. Science promotes the open-ended search; creationism supports giving up and looking no further. It is clear which method Gentry advocates.
("Gentry's Tiny Mystery -- Unsupported by Geology" by J. Richard Wakefield, Creation/Evolution Issue XXII, Winter 1987-1988, pp 31-32)

All what theories?

The quote from Kent Hovind is significant: Look at that from the position of one of the Pastors, Televangelists or the other Biblical Christian Snake Oil salesmen. If they are faced with the likelihood of seeing a 75% reduction is the number of pockets they can pick, this is a serious issue.What industry could stand even the risk of a 75% reduction in revenues and so anything like Evolution or Critical Thinking or Logic or Comparative Religion courses MUST be opposed.The Biblical Christian leaders, Pastors, Teacher and Evangelists are right to fear and fight those things which are a direct threat to their revenue flows. If they hope to maintain the golden river of money flowing into their coffers they must create a population of ignorant and non-thinking rubes to be fleeced.

---

Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!

Reasons for not teaching evolution:(1) Some people think it is not true.This would mean that you could not teach anything that anyone thought was false, if we taught evolution.(2) Evolution is just a theory.This would mean that you cannot teach any theories in any science, if we taught evolution.(3) There is no adequate explanation for the origin of life from dead chemicals.So we should skip any part of evolution having to do with the origin of life, if we taught evolution.(4) The fossil record lacks any transitional forms. So we should skip any fossil record that does not show any transitional forms, if we taught evolution.(5) The second Law of Thermodynamics is violated as evolution says that simple forms evolved into complex ones. So we would have to show where the external energy came from that powers things like plants, if we taught evolution.(6) The so-called Nebraska man was later re-analyzed and found to be Nebraska Pig.So we should not include the Nebraska Man, if we taught evolution.(7 ) The old age of the earth is based on assumptions.So we should establish the truth of the ages involved before teaching any principles of evolution that are based on age, if we taught evolution.(8) Very serious problems in the evolution of proteins threaten the theory of evolution, So we should skip any part of evolution relying on the origins of proteins, if we taught evolution.(9) There are strict limits to variation that are never crossed. So we should skip any part of evolution relying on crossing barriers to variation that don't happen, if we taught evolution.(10) The evidence used by Haeckel was faked and "Ontogeny recapitulates Phylogeny" is false. So we should teach the truth about embryology, if we taught evolution. Ref 1
Ref 2
Ref 3
Ref 4
Ref 5
Ref 6That's just a quick list of some arguments. I'm sure that with a little google work and looking for creationist arguments you should be able to fill several pages with similar arguments. Like I said before, they don't have to be good arguments (and using common creationist arguments as sources will guarantee that they aren't), they just need to be similar to arguments that are made in debating this “controversy” and the value of evolution.Enjoy.

---

Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

type [qs]quotes are easy[/qs] and it becomes: type [msg=-38] and it becomes: Message 38 (yep - you got it right )or type [quote]quotes are easy[/quote] and it becomes:

quote:

---

quotes are easy

---

also check out (help) links on any formating questions when in the reply window.Enjoy

---

Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

How did your report go, Dani?

---

It has become fashionable on the left and in Western Europe to compare the Bush administration to the Nazis. The comparison is not without some superficial merit. In both cases the government is run by a small gang of snickering, stupid thugs whose vision of paradise is full of explosions and beautifully designed prisons. -- Matt Taibbi