Why not teach problems with ToE in school?

I've rather lost track of the context of this question. How is it related to "problems" that should be taught?Also, what will you accept as examples? Each of us is genetically different from all others (almost -- when twins are considered). The differences between us confer greater strength to some, speed to others (apparently Lance Armstrongs thigh bones are longer than average, he has a larger than normal lung capacity etc), intelligence to others. Those differences may in some contexts (the French alps) be beneficial.Is that what you want?This message has been edited by NosyNed, 07-31-2004 10:38 AM

quote:

---

Christianity will never again be taught in the public schools.

---

Yeah, the US Constitution and that whole "Establishment Clause" thingy is such a downer, huh?You do know that the plaintiffs in the case that removed religious indoctrination by the government from our public schools was supported by many Christian and religious organizations, don't you?It was CHRISTIAN people who worked to get it out.Somehow, they thought that the government had no business teaching it's version of any religion to the children or citizens of this country.Funny, you seem to think that the government should be Fundamentalist Proteststant Christian and indoctrinate all children into Fundamentalist Protestant Christianity.Tell me, which sect should it be? One of the Evangelicals? Lutheran? Baptist? Church of God? Whaich religion should our government endorse?

quote:

---

The atheists would never allow it.

---

Neither would the mainstream Christians, Catholics, Muslims, Hindus, Jews, Buddhists, Native Americans, and all the other religious groups that are interested in raising their children free of YOUR desire to indoctrinate their children.

quote:

---

The strength of the resistance to such a movement from the atheists would simply over power any opposition.

---

Most religious groups oppose the promotion of religion by the government to be a very bad idea.Please explain how a Theocracy is Constitutional.

quote:

---

They would fight tooth and nail, with all their might, to stop such a thing.

---

Yes, and they would be joined by other Christians and other religious groups, as well.

quote:

---

I accept the Bible as truth because I have no reason to doubt it. This may make me a lousy science teacher in a public school system, but it does not make me uninformed or somehow less intelligent than anyone else.

---

No, not neccessarily less intelligent, but you have definitely shown yourself to be uninformed.Actually, it's worse than that. You have been ill-informed.You believe things that are not true regarding science and the Theory of Evolution.If we seem hostile and arrogant, it is probably becasue we are frustrated with the number of times some Creationist comes along and states the same incredibly wrong, anti-science, anti-intellectual silliness as every other Creationist has stated.What's worse, even though these folks, like you, are obviously lacking in even a basic understanding of the science involved, they feel perfectly comfortable poo-pooing it all.Tell me, do you reject the Germ Theory of Disease? The bible contradicts it, you know, as it contradicts Newton's Laws of Planetary Motion.IT is actually you who are arrogant, Jasonb, because you proclaim all of the Biological sciences to be false without the merest understanding of them.This message has been edited by schrafinator, 07-31-2004 11:31 AM

quote:

---

Loudmouth. Christianity is the source of all that is right in the world. For wxapmle America.

---

Why don't you ask the Native Americans if Christianity is the source of all that is right in the world?

quote:

---

Anyways though you are right there are evolutionist church goers (though not as many as you think).

---

How many are there, since you seem to know?

quote:

---

What of it.
That doesn't change that mostly we creationists find the motives of activists evolutionists and supporters to be crusading against Christianity as a influence in America.

---

Christianity is already a huge influence in America, and as far as political influence, it's the radical exttremist fundamentalists who are a small minority that have the most influence.

quote:

---

Also again there are few 9 to 5 paid evolutionary scientists.

---

What?There's somewhere close to half a million Earth and Life scientists in the US alone.It is true that most of them work longer hours every day than just 9-5, though.

quote:

---

And of coarse We don't believe they have a right to call themselves scientists but instead should be called historians.

---

Are Physicists, Geneticists, Astronomers, Cosmologicsts, and Geologists not scientists, but "historians", as well?

Please take this to:
Applying Science to Past Events

Robert Byers responds to me:

quote:

---

You make my point. There are just a few astrophysicsts, relatively, and yet great ideas are presented to society as if a great movement of minds has come to conclusions that must replace previous conclusions.

---

And you just made mine:You don't seem to complain when the astrophysicists do it. So why are you picking on evolutionary biologists?Obviously, it isn't the number of active scientists in the field that is causing your hackles to rise. It's the conclusions of their investigations that are.

quote:

---

Yet in the creationist world we claim thousands of years( hundreds of years in the intellectually advanced English-speaking world)by millions of people persuaded by the truth of scripture and ready to contend with all comers. And science thinkers too many too count.

---

Logical error: Argumentum ad populum.It doesn't matter how many people believe a dumb thing. It's still a dumb thing.By this logic, you should stop being a Christian since the vast majority of the world thinks your god is a figment of your imagination.Too, if you're going to use "science thinkers" as your justification, then we wind up concluding evolution as there is no significant group of "science thinkers" that advocate anything but evolution. If you look at any professional science organization such as the AAAS, you won't find any "creationism" or "intelligent design" field. You'll find lots of evolutionary disciplines, though. One would think that if creationism were such a common outlook among "science thinkers," they'd manage to get together during the conferences.Logical error: Complex question.You seem to think that if god is true, then evolution must be false. And yet, there is no reason to claim this. The official position of the Catholic church, for example, is that evolution is the only scientifically valid theory we have for explaining how life diversified on this planet. You're not calling the Pope an atheist, are you? I'm not saying you need to believe in Catholic theology. I am simply pointing out that the Pope believes in god and agrees with evolution.Are you saying god cannot create life that evolves?Have you considered the possibility that god does exist but not in the way you think?

---

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

I know the quote. That was my source. You misunderstand what I said.
It is ,at present the government that is keeping a belief out of the classroom in order to maintain another belief. Creationist being brought in is to remedy the original trespass by the government in saing the Christian teachings on origins is wrong. They said this by banning it in the classroom.

Evolution is not a belief. It is a conclusion based on evidence. The Theory of Evolution is a scientific theory that explains evolution.Neither are religious in nature.Creationism is religion.Creationism is not science.Creationism has no place in the science teachings in any school, public, Christian or any other form.That is why even Church schools, with the exception of a few cult type schools, do not teach Creationism as science.That is why the Christian community opposes teaching Creationism.There is no problem discussing problems with the Theory of Evolution, but the Creation Myths are not problems, they are religious myths pushed by a small but vocal cult and while they might be appropriate in a Religous Studies course, they are not science.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:

---

It is ,at present the government that is keeping a belief out of the classroom in order to maintain another belief. Creationist being brought in is to remedy the original trespass by the government in saing the Christian teachings on origins is wrong. They said this by banning it in the classroom.

---

The only "belief" in science is that the natural world can be described by using empirical evidence and human logic. Creationism failed this test while evolution passes this test. It is not the fault of science that creationism is not taught in science class. It is the fault of creationism for not supporting their theories with emperical evidence and refuting the evidence that falsifies creationism. You somehow believe that evolution is taught because the government wanted a secularist philosophy in science classrooms. This is false. Evolution is taught because it is the epitome of scientific inquiry, a theory that is consistent with all of the empirical evidence, a theory that makes testable predictions, and a theory that is used to improve technology and our understanding of the natural world. The purpose of creationism is to ignore scientific findings in order to indoctrinate people into a religious sect. Creationism is not an endeavor to consistently explain the world around us, but instead to explain why someone should hold a certain religious view. Creationism is not able to increase our technologies in medicine, ecology, chemistry, or astrophysics. Evolution is a tool that is both taught and USED. Creationism is a tool for religious indoctrination.

quote:

---

You seem to think that if god is true, then evolution must be false. And yet, there is no reason to claim this. The official position of the Catholic church, for example, is that evolution is the only scientifically valid theory we have for explaining how life diversified on this planet. You're not calling the Pope an atheist, are you? I'm not saying you need to believe in Catholic theology. I am simply pointing out that the Pope believes in god and agrees with evolution

---

Seeing how Catholics believe in the Bible i would assume they can point to the verse that says In the beginning life evolved by me? Or is it just there own interpretation of the scriptures? Because ever since Genesis, the years have been literal. If you go to Luke 3:23, you will see the genealogy of Jesus which goes back all the way to Adam. I would like to know when do these people stop becoming real people? When do these people become a fairytale of how the universe has evolved over billions of yrs through apes and natural selection.

umm... about those geneologies...Why don't you read the one in Luke, then the one in Mathew. Then lets talk about accuracy.

almeydaIt's been explained to you many, many times that almost all Christians not only accept the Theory of Evolution, but actively oppose teaching the pseudo-science of Creationism.But to remind you, here is a partial list of the Religious organizations here in the US that have come out in active opposition to Creation and support of Evolution. As Bishop Sims said in reference to using a literal interpretation of Genesis:

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

The genealogy in Matthew is of Joseph bloodline. Whereas the genealogy of Luke is of Marys.

They play some games with the geneologies. For example, to make things work they claim that Luke Geneology is that of Mary and that the beginning is showing Joseph's father-in-law. But that presents yet another problem and that is inheritance. To pass on the line of David it should have to go through the male child. So how could the line of David be passed through Mary?But fortunately, they found a loophole. See Numbers 27:8 and 36:6 for the solution.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

If evolution is true then i would not be a christian today. Because if evolution is true then there is no god unless its for your own spiritual thirst. Evolution puts death, bloodshed and disease before the fall of man. What kind of god brings about a world according to darwinian laws. Survival of the fittest, death and bloodshed? Moreover, God called everything before the fall 'very good' not just good, but 'very good'. I would never worship a god that calls death and bloodshed very good. I worship a god that tells me he made a perfect world for us to live in harmony with him but mans sin has seperated that relationship. Jesus Christ came so that we could escape the judgement on sin and live again with the 'very good' new Jerusalem.Churches and christians who are including a humanistic athiestic theory of man into Gods word are destroying Gods word. Without Genesis as true history of the world then christianity has no foundation for its faith. Sin = Genesis, Creation = Genesis, Marriage = Genesis, Clothing = Genesis. Without Genesis the Bible has no foundation and no absolute authority. And we all become Jars. New age philosophers. We are all god. All beliefs are beautiful. Mother Geisha is our saviour. Right Jar?This message has been edited by almeyda, 08-06-2004 12:59 AM