Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   AntiGod education should not be compulsary (even for non wealthy)
Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.7


Message 16 of 281 (83347)
02-05-2004 10:44 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by Itachi Uchiha
02-05-2004 10:32 AM


Dont start that crap man. I can think for myself and besides he never said anything about biology it was physics class
I never said you couldn't think for yourself.
He told you evolution was crap. Evolution is biology. Therfore he told you about biology. In any case it's not really the point. The point is that there is no reason to believe anything about physics is more valid than what biology says. When talking about biology, the biology is more important than the physics.
If evolution was contradicted by the second law of thermodynamics (it isn't) then that would be proof that the second law of thermodynamics is false.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Itachi Uchiha, posted 02-05-2004 10:32 AM Itachi Uchiha has not replied

hitchy
Member (Idle past 5117 days)
Posts: 215
From: Southern Maryland via Pittsburgh
Joined: 01-05-2004


Message 17 of 281 (83349)
02-05-2004 10:48 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Itachi Uchiha
02-05-2004 9:32 AM


where do you get your info jazzlover?
1. evolution does not violate the second law of thermodynamics. earth is an open system that receives energy from sun. when no more energy is input into the system, then entropy will take over. saying that evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics is like saying you could not develop into a more complex human from a single-celled zygote!
2. evolution is the change in the frequency of alleles in a population over time. one example of evolution that we have all seen in our time is the development of drug-resistant bacteria.
3. transitional fossils are abundant. the whale series, the horse series, the synapsids, archeaopteryx, etc.
hurry, go to your school and ask for your money back. also, if you are going to continue to parrot false and misleading ideas, provide a better argument than "b/c he/she/i said so".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Itachi Uchiha, posted 02-05-2004 9:32 AM Itachi Uchiha has not replied

mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4752
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 18 of 281 (83358)
02-05-2004 11:11 AM


Dear fellow creo,
Hey Jazz'. We know you can think for yourself, everybody here does or they would not attend.
But to be honest (I'm creo), the statement " evolution is a religion " is best avoided. Why?
- Because,
1. It is a theory which holds nor religious principles or doctrine.
2. It deals with biology alone. Any learning of the theory shows us this, as you probably know.
3. It is based on "Theory" in the scientific sense of the word, and as we all know scientific theory is/can be negotiated, whereas religion cannot be amongst the religious.
So it's a bit like saying " Gravity is a religion "
If as creationists we say these things, our arguments will start to look desperate at best. I only tell you this because I've discovered how frustrating it can be when we creationists call evolutionists religious. That's not their ball park. Infact they don't really deal with it religiously, they literally are the antithesis of religious.
I agree God should be taught in schools, I've argued for the science class in the past (for creation), but the problem is it is also Philosophical and Theological as well as a bit of Science. Biology is only science. That might be the difference, humans enjoy categorizing, how do you categorize Creation?
Don't get me wrong, I too think there is scientific aspects to Apologetics, but at most - aspects.

MrHambre
Member (Idle past 1392 days)
Posts: 1495
From: Framingham, MA, USA
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 19 of 281 (83362)
02-05-2004 11:18 AM


2LOT of baloney
I'm still more interested in the educational background of the creationists here. Is it only an accident that most of them have precious little real experience learning about biology? Most of the evolutionists either work in the field or have studied extensively, and we are also familiar with creationist writers and their work. The creationists learn everything second hand and in a scattershot fashion.
Some of the more educated posters from the creationist camp display a troubling messiah complex for their new favorite writer. It could be they just discovered Michael Behe, Phillip Johnson, Richard Milton, or some other scribe who's fired their imagination with an anti-Darwinian manifesto. The allegations made are assumed to be true, and any attempt to refute the argument is dismissed as ' desperate defense of an outmoded paradigm' or what have you.
I agree people should think for themselves, and examine all the evidence available. But think, for crying out loud!

The dark nursery of evolution is very dark indeed.
Brad McFall

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by NosyNed, posted 02-05-2004 11:20 AM MrHambre has replied
 Message 34 by simple, posted 02-05-2004 3:22 PM MrHambre has not replied

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 20 of 281 (83365)
02-05-2004 11:20 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by MrHambre
02-05-2004 11:18 AM


Education Level
Is there an correlation between lower levels of education and belief in creationism perhaps? The more generally ignorant you are the more you are inclined to believe?

Common sense isn't

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by MrHambre, posted 02-05-2004 11:18 AM MrHambre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by MrHambre, posted 02-05-2004 11:29 AM NosyNed has not replied
 Message 22 by Coragyps, posted 02-05-2004 12:01 PM NosyNed has not replied
 Message 35 by simple, posted 02-05-2004 3:26 PM NosyNed has replied

MrHambre
Member (Idle past 1392 days)
Posts: 1495
From: Framingham, MA, USA
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 21 of 281 (83369)
02-05-2004 11:29 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by NosyNed
02-05-2004 11:20 AM


Re: Education Level
Ned,
I'm more inclined to believe it's the pattern of learning. If someone reads widely about science and philosophy, they'll be more able to understand the subtleties of the debate and less likely to fall prey to Phillip Johnson double-talk. However, many tend to think that one source is all they need in order to approach the matter in an informed way. If someone doesn't like science enough to study it from different perspectives, they may end up with a narrow view of the subject as a whole.

The dark nursery of evolution is very dark indeed.
Brad McFall

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by NosyNed, posted 02-05-2004 11:20 AM NosyNed has not replied

Coragyps
Member (Idle past 734 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 22 of 281 (83373)
02-05-2004 12:01 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by NosyNed
02-05-2004 11:20 AM


Re: Education Level
Is there an correlation between lower levels of education and belief in creationism perhaps? The more generally ignorant you are the more you are inclined to believe?
Most definitely a correlation - see Appendix Table 7-10 at the National Science Foundation page:
http://www.nsf.gov/sbe/srs/seind02/c7/c7h.htm
For example, the percentage of people who said "yes" when asked if early humans lived at the same time as dinosaurs goes from 36% of those who didn't finish high school to 67% of those with postgrad education. The latter number, BTW, is the one that makes me worry.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by NosyNed, posted 02-05-2004 11:20 AM NosyNed has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by MrHambre, posted 02-05-2004 12:30 PM Coragyps has not replied
 Message 24 by Minnemooseus, posted 02-05-2004 12:30 PM Coragyps has replied

MrHambre
Member (Idle past 1392 days)
Posts: 1495
From: Framingham, MA, USA
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 23 of 281 (83381)
02-05-2004 12:30 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Coragyps
02-05-2004 12:01 PM


Re: Education Level
I think you mean the percentage of people who answered the question correctly, i.e. answered 'no.' That's what table 7-10 leads me to believe.
I agree, a mere 67% of grad students responding correctly is disgraceful. Did the other 33% do their post-grad work at Patriot College or something?
[This message has been edited by MrHambre, 02-05-2004]

The dark nursery of evolution is very dark indeed.
Brad McFall

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Coragyps, posted 02-05-2004 12:01 PM Coragyps has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by nator, posted 02-06-2004 8:34 AM MrHambre has not replied

Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3941
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 24 of 281 (83382)
02-05-2004 12:30 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Coragyps
02-05-2004 12:01 PM


Re: Education Level
Did you flip some information around there? The more educated, more believe that man and dinosaurs co-existed???
Moose

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Coragyps, posted 02-05-2004 12:01 PM Coragyps has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Coragyps, posted 02-05-2004 12:36 PM Minnemooseus has not replied
 Message 26 by Percy, posted 02-05-2004 12:40 PM Minnemooseus has not replied

Coragyps
Member (Idle past 734 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 25 of 281 (83385)
02-05-2004 12:36 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Minnemooseus
02-05-2004 12:30 PM


Re: Education Level
Dammit! That's what I get for trying to get some work done during posting hours!
Yes, I should have typed "no".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Minnemooseus, posted 02-05-2004 12:30 PM Minnemooseus has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 26 of 281 (83387)
02-05-2004 12:40 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Minnemooseus
02-05-2004 12:30 PM


Re: Education Level
He misread the table (http://www.nsf.gov/sbe/srs/seind02/append/c7/at07-10.pdf). The percentages are for those providing the correct answer to the questions, not for those answering "yes".
Scarier is the misconceptions of the test constructors. True-or-false question H is, "The universe began with a huge explosion." One of the first misconceptions people have to be disabused of when they discuss cosmic origins here is that it wasn't so much an explosion as an expansion.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Minnemooseus, posted 02-05-2004 12:30 PM Minnemooseus has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Coragyps, posted 02-05-2004 12:52 PM Percy has not replied

Coragyps
Member (Idle past 734 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 27 of 281 (83396)
02-05-2004 12:52 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by Percy
02-05-2004 12:40 PM


Re: Education Level
Yeah, Percy, that one bugged me, too. They've been using the same survey for several years, and I guess they keep it for consistency's sake.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Percy, posted 02-05-2004 12:40 PM Percy has not replied

Abshalom
Inactive Member


Message 28 of 281 (83402)
02-05-2004 1:11 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by hitchy
02-05-2004 1:04 AM


Better Late Than Never
Hitch:
I saw Message #1 yesterday and thought, "Yawn."
But since the thread is staying alive, I thought to answer your Message #2 for support reasons.
Hitch asks, "what is wrong with teaching an incredibly well-supported and robust scientific theory that makes no claim on the supernatural in public schools?"
Absolutely nothing is wrong with that at all.
Hitch asks, "if you want creation to be taught, which...yawn...creation story should we include?"
Who cares which and who cares where? Not in public schools for sure. Sunday schools and on the History Channel seems like good places to me. And maybe as substitute programming for that "fair and balanced" morning news show for ninnies.
Hitch asks "also, what other parts of the constitution do you want to get rid of next?"
I bet they don't want the 2nd ammendment nixed as they might run out of guns to protect themselves from all the rescued fetuses they have adopted and corrupted. But they probably want the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment removed so they can reinstitute capital punishment for homosexuality, witchcraft, adultery, etc.
Hitch claims, "the ammendment that keeps creationism, a religious viewpoint, out of public schools is the same ammendment that gives you the freedom to express your misguided opinions as well as your choice of religion without gov't hinderance (unless of course it harms the public good...)
You mean like when Bubba hollers out "fire!" in a crowded theater showing a newsreel of a Klan cross-burning?
Hitch admits, "maybe you should know that i am one of 'those' science teachers. you know the kind that teaches kids how to think critically and exam evidence and perform actual science."
Thank god for good public school instructors dedicated to providing our children with quality education. And, thank you Hitch!
Hitch says, "if i want to read the bible to children, i'd do it in sunday 'compulsory education' school."
I disagree. I would make that particular class optional.
Disclaimer: I think everyone should read the Exodus story, Samuels One and Two, Ecclesiastes, Ezra, and Ester at a minimum.
Peace.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by hitchy, posted 02-05-2004 1:04 AM hitchy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by hitchy, posted 02-05-2004 2:24 PM Abshalom has not replied
 Message 36 by simple, posted 02-05-2004 3:34 PM Abshalom has not replied

hitchy
Member (Idle past 5117 days)
Posts: 215
From: Southern Maryland via Pittsburgh
Joined: 01-05-2004


Message 29 of 281 (83419)
02-05-2004 2:24 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by Abshalom
02-05-2004 1:11 PM


thank you. i appreciate the support.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Abshalom, posted 02-05-2004 1:11 PM Abshalom has not replied

simple 
Inactive Member


Message 30 of 281 (83425)
02-05-2004 3:07 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by hitchy
02-05-2004 1:04 AM


plenty
what is wrong with teaching an incredibly well-supported and robust scientific theory that makes no claim on the supernatural in public schools
The results! (poor kids brought up with no clue, no hope, no right or wrong etc.) Also, I might feel better if evolution was taught as supernatural, as it is a faith based religion of unbelief in God.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by hitchy, posted 02-05-2004 1:04 AM hitchy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by Dan Carroll, posted 02-05-2004 3:20 PM simple has replied
 Message 47 by Taqless, posted 02-05-2004 6:01 PM simple has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024