|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,422 Year: 3,679/9,624 Month: 550/974 Week: 163/276 Day: 3/34 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Should we teach both evolution and religion in school? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 189 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
But if something is riddled with the features of intelligent design, inductively 100% of the tally of evidence shows such features altogether are only found in intelligently designed things. 0% of such features found together, are ever found in something not designed.
Lovely example of circular reasoning.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1426 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hi Mike
RAZD, no offence but I think you are using a rhetorical device here called, "playing it up". To prove claims of abiogenesis you don't need evidence of single celled organisms as we already know they exist. Singled cell organisms are the "complete" stage of abiogenesis, so the evidence for abiogenesis can't be the complete stage. ... That's my point, MIke: at 4 billion years no life but at 3.5 billion years life. We don't know what happened in between.
Again I think this is misleading. I could for example say, "the point of origin of the Antikythera mechanism is not known nor the process" and then by using the unqualified question-begging term, "process" this then IMPLIES without qualification, that there was any such natural "process". OR a supernatural process (or panspermia?). We don't know. Enjoyby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1426 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
History cannot be understood in any depth without God. You do not have to agree. Perhaps in some country of 95% atheists, you might peddle your godless version of history. Which god/s? Does history change depending on which religion you believe, which country you are living in? Does China have a different history -- where no world wide floods are mentioned and a different view of the age of the earth -- because they have/had different god/s? Actual history cannot be understood in any depth without evidence. You do not have to agree. Troy was thought to be mythological until evidence was found for it.
There is no freedom of thought when faith in God and truth is religiously oppressed and denied. And that is why we have freedom of religion - for anyone to believe what they want to - here in the US. There is also no freedom of thought when someone's "faith in God and truth is religiously" imposed on others.
As for the failings of science, ideas are constantly being changed as old ones are shown to be wrong. They found comets could not have brought the water in oceans, so they dropped that for example. Of course they jumped to godless belief based conclusions such as 'it must have come from asteroids'. Ha. What I asked for was "Please provide one such example and then show who determined they failed and how they determined it. (Hint: it wasn't by religious belief). Claims are easy to make, can you substantiate them?" Curiously, all you have provided is another in a long list of scientific hypothesis/theory where further evidence showed the hypothesis/theory to be invalid, so it was discarded. This is how science works -- it isn't a failing of science, it is the strength of science, and it is why science is not a belief based system.
Science found the error, not religious belief, and science then corrected the hypothesis/theory ... something you never see with religious beliefs. Your lack of understanding of what science is and does leads you to silly conclusions.
Your billions of years claims and all origin claims are pure religion. No fact or reality to them whatsoever. And assertions of denial are not any argument or evidence to invalidate the science. The only one you are fooling is yourself.
You cannot test God or origins with paltry science. ... You cannot test anything with science when there is no evidence.
... Not since science is bound with the straightjacket of fishbowl philsophy, godless conjecture and criteria, and a tiny pool of possible explanations for the unknown. Science builds a model (an approximation of reality) based on what it knows, making hypothesis/theory to further explain it, making predictions to test those hypothesis/theories to validate or invalidate them, and by removing hypothesis/theory that are invalid improve the model (approximation of reality). Curiously it does not matter how little we know, what matters is that the evidence supports what we know, that science in toto is internally consistent and able to build, test and find new information. Religion and faith based beliefs don't do that, because they think they know the answers.
Questioning is fine, but godless inquisition and propaganda is not fine. Says the person trying to impose his religious beliefs on science and education.
Tell us how electron density will tell us what time is like? If the actual interstellar medium electron density matches the predicted values, then that will validate the current space-time model of the universe. If the actual interstellar medium electron density differs from the predicted values, then that will mean the current space-time model of the universe needs to be adjusted, modified or discarded. Enjoyby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
creation Member (Idle past 1964 days) Posts: 654 Joined: |
Ancient nations believed in spirits. Not all spirits are of God, but that doesn't mean they were not real.
Western history, specifically surrounding Israel and area was totally impacted by prophesy and Scripture. Rome, Greece, Persia, Egypt etc. Now if you want to teach Chinese lore in schools in China, fine. Freedom of religion..? More like..'anything BUT Christ' You say 'science builds a model based on what it knows..' Not about the spiritual aspect of life and history! Science plays around way out in left field, ignoring history and evidences, save the little select few sorts of so called evidences it deems acceptable to it's godless belief system. Imposing beliefs..? I say let a majority decide. If they are Christian...let the main thrust be so. I do not like your beliefs imposed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1426 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
Ancient nations believed in spirits. Not all spirits are of God, but that doesn't mean they were not real. Western history, specifically surrounding Israel and area was totally impacted by prophesy and Scripture. Rome, Greece, Persia, Egypt etc. Now if you want to teach Chinese lore in schools in China, fine. Freedom of religion..? More like..'anything BUT Christ' You say 'science builds a model based on what it knows..' Not about the spiritual aspect of life and history! Science plays around way out in left field, ignoring history and evidences, save the little select few sorts of so called evidences it deems acceptable to it's godless belief system. Science deals with facts, objective empirical evidence, not with fantasy, myth, belief, faith, opinion, imagination, etc. Things that apply to everyone, not just to people who are follows of fantasy, myth, belief, faith, opinion, imagination, etc. ... it excludes concepts that are not fact-based because they cannot be validated. History also deals with facts, objective empirical evidence, not with fantasy, myth, belief, faith, opinion, imagination, etc. Things that apply to everyone. Historical accuracy is subject to validation with facts, objective empirical evidence. History can deal with how beliefs have affected historical behavior but not with whether those beliefs are valid.
Imposing beliefs..? I say let a majority decide. If they are Christian...let the main thrust be so. ... Ah yes, the logical fallacy of an appeal to popularity:
quote: Facts are not subject to popular opinion, they exist and will continue to exist long after beliefs have died. Do you want to vote on whether or not chairs exist? The place to teach religious beliefs is in the respective houses of worship, in the homes of the believers, and in any gathering of believers. Forcing non-believers to be included is imposing beliefs on non-believers, and that is wrong.
... I do not like your beliefs imposed. Says the person who wants to impose his beliefs on science, the universe, and all non-believers in his personal fantasy. Enjoy Edited by RAZD, : .by our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 306 days) Posts: 16113 Joined:
|
Imposing beliefs..? I say let a majority decide. If they are Christian...let the main thrust be so. If the majority of people think something untrue, that's not a reason to teach it, that's a reason to din the opposite forcefully in their ears. For example if most people think the capital of Australia is Sydney that's not what we should teach in schools, instead we should make a special point of telling them that it's Canberra.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
creation Member (Idle past 1964 days) Posts: 654 Joined: |
If they believe it over what you say is the truth, who is to decide? If we want ti impose truth, why not start in the idiocy infested schools in the west? They teach kids that they can pick what sex they want to be and get legally accepted!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
creation Member (Idle past 1964 days) Posts: 654 Joined: |
Baloney. Science deals in religion. Belief. Godless fable manufacturing. They are in no position to tell any nation that no spirits lived long ago...you kidding? They cannot speak from knowledge on such issues.
History is basically the conquering liars having their records exist where maybe the losers had theirs burned or some such. It is not fact. You need to be able to sort through the garbage and find what is fact or fiction. Teaching history cannot be done right without seeing the great underlying force behind it. Forcing anyone to go to school means that they might need to fit in somewhat with the population, one would think. They should not enter an area with a majority believing one way and expect kid glove treatment for their personal belief system.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1426 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Baloney. Science deals in religion. Belief. Godless fable manufacturing. ... Nope. This has been explained to you ad nauseum, but it would appear that the only thought process you are capable of understanding is belief based systems. Science is tentative, belief isn't. Science tests the tentative conclusions/predictions to see if they are valid, belief doesn't. Science alters the tentative conclusions when tests show they are invalid, belief doesn't.
... They are in no position to tell any nation that no spirits lived long ago...you kidding? They cannot speak from knowledge on such issues. You have it the wrong way around ... again. They are in no position to say whether spirits lived long ago or not ... because there is a distinct lack of evidence for any such existence.
History is basically the conquering liars having their records exist where maybe the losers had theirs burned or some such. It is not fact. ... History documents events, including human caused and natural disasters. Evidence of those events validates the history.
... You need to be able to sort through the garbage and find what is fact or fiction. ... And that is done by finding evidence that supports the factual parts or contradicts the fictional parts. Evidence is the key, whether it confirms belief or invalidates it. Rational people discard beliefs that are contradicted by evidence (such as the earth is not flat, the earth is not the center of the universe or age of the earth).
... Teaching history cannot be done right without seeing the great underlying force behind it. Human behavior.
Forcing anyone to go to school means that they might need to fit in somewhat with the population, one would think. Indeed. There are options in the US: private schools and home schooling for example. However, I don't think known falsehoods should be taught (Holocaust denial for instance, but also flat earth, geocentric earth, young earth).
They should not enter an area with a majority believing one way and expect kid glove treatment for their personal belief system. But they should be able to expect acceptance and respect for their alternative views ... as long as they do not involve known falsehoods. Enjoyby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 306 days) Posts: 16113 Joined:
|
If they believe it over what you say is the truth, who is to decide? The people who know the facts. Just because there are two positions on what the capital of Australia is, that doesn't mean that it's actually in doubt, or that the two beliefs are equally valid. There is actual information to be had on the subject. And the same is true of genetics, geology, paleontology, etc.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
creation Member (Idle past 1964 days) Posts: 654 Joined: |
You cannot explain why science of origins is not belief based. It is. Your opinion cannot change it.
The evidence for spirits having lived was that they were known to people then. Science has no ability to confirm or deny. To pretend otherwise is dishonest. History is the story of man. That involves more than ruins. Human behavior is the result of what is in man. One cannot understand sin without understanding creation and God. Private schools? How about if people do not want anything influencing them from the majority, they go private? Meanwhile, one should not have to resort to private education to have majority beliefs included! yOU ARE IN NO POSITION TO TELL ANYONE WHAT FALSEHOOD IS.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 433 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
creation writes:
It isn't. Your opinion cannot change it. You cannot explain why science of origins is not belief based. It is. Your opinion cannot change it. People with different beliefs - Christian, Muslim, atheists, etc. - agree about origins. Their beliefs have been filtered out. YOU can not explain why people with very different belief systems would have the same (scientific) explanation of origins.And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18299 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
He (she?) will likely argue that despite all having different beliefs, everyone "believes" in this false religion known as science...and thus get deluded. creation likely believes much as faith does---in a literal Bible, a literal flood, literal Adam & Eve, Whales, snakes, and so on.
When it comes to education, however, we need to go with evidence rather than belief. That's my 2 cents.Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 433 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
And why would that be? There's a million ways to be wrong. Why would they all pick the same one? He (she?) will likely argue that despite all having different beliefs, everyone "believes" in this false religion known as science...and thus get deluded.And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18299 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
Apart from picking on each other, science appears to be the common enemy...at least in creations world. I, on the other hand, believe that human wisdom and ego are the common enemies. Problem is, my critics can indict me on the same charge.
Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024