Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9077 total)
95 online now:
AZPaul3, Tanypteryx, Theodoric (3 members, 92 visitors)
Newest Member: Contrarian
Post Volume: Total: 894,025 Year: 5,137/6,534 Month: 557/794 Week: 48/135 Day: 25/23 Hour: 2/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Should we teach both evolution and religion in school?
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 6737
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.9


(1)
Message 184 of 2059 (728706)
06-02-2014 2:26 AM
Reply to: Message 183 by Maezeppa
06-01-2014 2:46 PM


Re: School is for Facts
Hi, Maezeppa, welcome to EvC.

You are most correct. School science classes are for teaching science. I, personally, do not see any reason for having any religious classes in school. This, to me, detracts away from the training/teaching/learning a secular public school needs to provide for the student to fit and succeed in this culture. Home and church can provide any religious training necessary, though I don't believe any such training is good for the human species considering the problems we face with where we are and where we're going.

At the top of the screen under the banner there is a command bar. If you hit "All Topics" you will see a list of all the most recent topics with the latest and greatest messages for the present on-going discussions. Come on over and join in.

Again, welcome to EvC

Edited by AZPaul3, : spl'n as usual.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 183 by Maezeppa, posted 06-01-2014 2:46 PM Maezeppa has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 185 by NoNukes, posted 06-04-2014 12:12 AM AZPaul3 has seen this message
 Message 186 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-04-2014 1:11 AM AZPaul3 has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 6737
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 188 of 2059 (728904)
06-04-2014 3:23 AM
Reply to: Message 186 by New Cat's Eye
06-04-2014 1:11 AM


Re: School is for Facts
I have a one-word rebuttal for you: Anthropology.

Ya got me. I surrender.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 186 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-04-2014 1:11 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 189 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-04-2014 12:28 PM AZPaul3 has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 6737
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 190 of 2059 (729079)
06-05-2014 3:55 PM
Reply to: Message 189 by New Cat's Eye
06-04-2014 12:28 PM


Re: School is for Facts
I remember reading some ****** poetry in English class and the teacher is all: "What does it mean to you?"

In my English class we digested Paul Simon's "I am a rock" and Paul McCartney's "Eleanor Rigby."

So my point remains since the "fact" is, CS, you went to the wrong school.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 189 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-04-2014 12:28 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 191 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-05-2014 4:20 PM AZPaul3 has seen this message

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 6737
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 1275 of 2059 (843441)
11-17-2018 4:48 PM
Reply to: Message 1268 by creation
11-15-2018 7:54 PM


Re: Conclusion vs Assumption, Belief, teach the difference
What science covers/deals with the far past early history of man and what nature existed?

All of it.

Pretending science is needed/available to deal with this is not honest.

Wow.

So you actually believe that there were no processes in the past that left any evidence of their workings in the present? That if any of the physical constants were significantly different in the recent past (geologically speaking) we could not see those differences in what they left behind?

How utterly ignorant.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1268 by creation, posted 11-15-2018 7:54 PM creation has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1276 by creation, posted 11-19-2018 1:50 PM AZPaul3 has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 6737
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 1278 of 2059 (843646)
11-19-2018 6:49 PM
Reply to: Message 1276 by creation
11-19-2018 1:50 PM


Re: Conclusion vs Assumption, Belief, teach the difference
So what DO you have??

I have a poster who spouts inanity without any evidence or reason.

What was left here does not tell us what nature existed.

What makes you think this "nature" was any different from today? or 200,000 years ago? or 200 million years ago?

People looked the same after the nature change, they just started to live a lot less years.

And your evidence for this is what?

Since we do not have DNA from early man we can't use that.

You ever hear about Minnesota Woman or Kennewick Man or The Anzick boy? Considerably older then Noah, DNA and all.

I know, I know, scientists couldn't possibly sequence their DNA because YOU can't comprehend the science.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1276 by creation, posted 11-19-2018 1:50 PM creation has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1283 by creation, posted 11-20-2018 1:45 AM AZPaul3 has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 6737
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.9


(2)
Message 1285 of 2059 (843690)
11-20-2018 7:40 AM
Reply to: Message 1283 by creation
11-20-2018 1:45 AM


Re: Conclusion vs Assumption, Belief, teach the difference
ALL remains of humans are post flood.

And your evidence for this is what?

The dates they assign to remains are faith based nonsense.

You have no idea how these datings (multiple datings from multiple lines of inquiry) are achieved, do you. You do not know the science involved but it doesn't matter. The datings knock your crackpot conjectures into the trashcan and so must be wrong. Problem is, creation, you haven't ANY evidence against the datings that would challenge the multiple lines of independent scientific evidence FOR the datings. You are left with pissing into the wind. Got some on your leg there, buddy.

quote:
So you actually believe that there were no processes in the past that left any evidence of their workings in the present? That if any of the physical constants were significantly different in the recent past (geologically speaking) we could not see those differences in what they left behind?

Care to actually answer the questions?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1283 by creation, posted 11-20-2018 1:45 AM creation has taken no action

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 6737
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.9


(3)
Message 1374 of 2059 (875621)
04-30-2020 9:26 PM
Reply to: Message 1369 by candle2
04-30-2020 5:01 PM


Re: Please define what you mean by Evolution
Can you explain stellar evolution? Can you explain biological evolution? Can you explain chemical evolution?

Stellar evolution.
- Hydrogen gas cloud
- Gravitational attraction, gravitational collapse
- Nuclear fusion
- Stellar nucleosynthesis
- Nuclear fuel exhaustion
- Stellar core collapse, nova, supernova, hypernova
- White dwarf, neutron star, black hole.

Biological evolution
- Chemical replication, RNA, DNA
- Descent with modification
- Reproductive isolation
- Speciation

Chemical evolution
- Quantum Field Theory
- Stellar nucleosynthesis
- Fine structure constant
- Electron bonding
- Molecular synthesis

What else you want to know?


Factio Republicana delenda est.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1369 by candle2, posted 04-30-2020 5:01 PM candle2 has taken no action

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 6737
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.9


(1)
Message 1385 of 2059 (875703)
05-03-2020 2:55 PM
Reply to: Message 1381 by candle2
05-03-2020 7:39 AM


Re: Evolution over Religion
Species change they say is carried out by one of two processes.

Wow, are you behind. Haven’t kept up on your studies. Speciation has many more than two vectors. First, all speciation, all change, is by modification and natural selection. Your question confuses the type of change, the method of change and the rate of change.

Look up allopatric speciation vs peripatric vs parapatric vs sympatric speciation.

Then look up the methods of natural selection we see in populations like the Wallace Effect, ecological selection, sexual selection, polyploidy speciation, hybrid speciation and gene transposition.

Finally, understand that the rate of change varies all over the map for every population on the planet. The rate of speciation is dependent on the selective pressures the population lives under and the type(s) of selective pressures being applied. Phyletic gradualism and Punctuated equilibrium exist at opposite ends of a sliding spectrum, not as separate binary operations.

Know your subject before coming in here with all your bluster. Learn something first.

They cannot agree on this.

Of course “they” don’t agree. This is complex science not your grade-school simplistic ignorance. Any controversy comes in with how much of what is evident in this complex mess due to lack of details and pretty much within a very narrow set of extremely complex details. As details become known the consensus solidifies. This is the good thing, the fun thing, in science. This is its strength. You need further study here on how and why science is conducted the way it is.

remember that they claim evolution is a proven fact

Bullshit. This is science. We don’t do “proof”. We do the preponderance of the evidence, the weighing of the facts.

The preponderance of the evidence, the great weight of all the known facts, shows that our Theory of Evolution is, by far, the most comprehensive and consistent explanation for the diversity of life on this planet. No “proof” necessary.

how did life originate? Please duplicate the process in order to make me a believer.

We don’t know for certain though we have some good promising hypotheses. As for duplication, hey our chemistry professor, Mother Nature, took ~350 million years to figure that out the first time. We’ve only been at this for 70+-. Give us some time, we’ll figure it out. Patience, candle2, patience.

Besides, this lack of knowledge has nothing to do with the Theory of Evolution. The ToE starts once abiogenesis has completed doing its thing.

In the meantime, if you want to try and hide your god in this hole of ignorance in our knowledge then please do. Just so he understands he is taking up temporary residence only and will have to move on to hide in some other ignorant hole soon enough.

How did the DNA code originate? For proof, please duplicate the process.

Again, we use those three little words you creationists so hate, “We don’t know, yet.”

And again, this has no bearing on the efficacy, the strength of evidence, for the ToE.

Doesn’t matter if DNA used xanthine in place of adenine or used methyluracil in place of cytosine or if the codon CAG tagged glutamine or tagged histidine instead. Whatever the code turned out to be the processes of the ToE would be the same. While the code is vital to its functioning, the specifics of how the code came to be is of no concern for evolution. Once a code, of whatever chemicals, however devised, was produced then evolution had something to work upon. Decent with modification. Mutation with natural selection.

Who wrote the enormous volume (all the world's data can fit on a DNA hard drive the size of a teaspoon? Who programmed the more than 3 billion letters of the DNA? Since you have proof of how it happened, I would like a step by step analysis.

The human 3 billion base pairs? That’s small. The Amoeba Polychaos dubium has 670 billion base pair in its genome.

The size of a genome is the result of numerous additions, deletions, insertions, duplications, combinations. In addition to things like single-nucleotide polymorphisms, copy errors and frame shift errors, these are all considered “mutations” to a genome.

No one “wrote” a genome. The genome evolves along with the population it inhabits. It’s all out on the web. Take some time and look it up. You can learn all about how genomes grow, contract and change with examples.

Here’s one to help get you started:

Gene duplication as a mechanism of genomic adaptation

Mutations have very destructive effects; they are responsible for more than a 1000 dangers to humans hemophilic is one.

Oh, you don’t know the half of it.

Mutations come in three flavors: The good (beneficial), the bad (deleterious) and the … not ugly, just don’t care, yet (neutral)

Neutral mutations are the majority and don’t do anything cept sit there waiting to see what happens next. They may sit there for a long time doing nothing or they may be mutated out of the genome, become beneficial because of some other mutation or environmental change or become deleterious for similar reasons.

Beneficial mutations may seem rare but in a population of billions with an average (human) mutation rate of 100 per child beneficial mutations enter the population quite readily … in droves … by the millions.

Deleterious mutations are the bad ones. These are the killers. There are lots of them. More than you realize.

In the human population deleterious mutations kill more humans than are born. Estimates are that genetic mutation kills upwards of 50% of all conceptuses while the mother never even knew she had conceived. Add to this the number of miscarriages and the number of stillbirths and ... well ...

Evolution is a real bitch.

Look it up. We’re not hiding anything here. It’s all out there waiting for you to learn.

Please explain (in minute detail) how a simple cell, which if far more complex than a space shuttle, came to be.

Again, like the genome, cell complexity evolved through descent with modification and natural selection. And like the evolution of all life, it had more failures, setbacks, false starts and blind alleys than successes. And, yet, here we are.

Here. Read up on it. The Origin and Evolution of Cells - The Cell - NCBI Bookshelf

In conclusion, we don’t have to prove to you that evolution is true. All we need do is show a preponderance of the evidence in favor of the mechanisms and processes of the Theory of Evolution. We’ve done that in spades. Look up all the different facets, all the different processes and mechanisms that are the Theory of Evolution. See the overwhelming body of evidence that supports the theory. Read ‘em and weep.

If you think you can disprove any of the facts in evidence for evolution then have at it.

But, understand, candle2, that lacking sufficient knowledge of some specific topic is not disproof, especially in areas where evolution is not involved like abiogenesis.

Insisting on “proof” and duplication is the creationist displaying his own ignorance of the subjects involved and the creationist’s simplistic childish view of the complexity of reality. It make you look really stupid.

Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.


Factio Republicana delenda est.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1381 by candle2, posted 05-03-2020 7:39 AM candle2 has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 1386 by RAZD, posted 05-03-2020 5:06 PM AZPaul3 has seen this message

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 6737
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.9


(1)
Message 1387 of 2059 (875710)
05-03-2020 5:43 PM
Reply to: Message 1382 by candle2
05-03-2020 11:22 AM


Re: Please define what you mean by Evolution
You posted about how certain processes have shaped biological, chemical, and cosmic evolution. But, they are mere guesses and nothing more.

You have no idea what those processes are do you. You have no idea how they work, how we know how they work, what the facts are, the hard real-world demonstrable, repeatable, verifiable facts, do you.

You wouldn’t know a clade from a nested hierarchy would you. You don’t know your haploid from your diploid do you. Or how we measure the fine structure constant or why it is important to valence electrons do you.

And without knowing the subject, the reasons, the facts of how we know, the deep detailed study of these phenomena, without any reason other than your religious naysaying, your emotional wishful thinking, you have the audacity to come in here and tell us we are wrong?

You have even less authority than a flat earther riding a unicorn through the Elysian Fields or an alien abductee spouting autodynamics at a Tupperware party.

I don't know how old the Earth is, but the Bible teaches that it is more than 6000 years old.

One of the few things your senseless bible got right. In fact the earth is 4.5 billion years old but you have no idea how we know this do you. You haven’t a clue to the facts, the hard in the lab real facts, we use to arrive at this number do you.

David states (Psalms 104:30) that God renewed (Strongs' #2318 rebuild) the face of the Earth.

And Douglas states that Earth will be destroyed to make room for a new hyperspace bypass (HGTTG, pg 22).

The creation account is to be viewed from the vantage of one standing on Earth, not viewed from space.

The creation account is to be view from a rubber room standing in a straight jacket, not viewed from any semblance of sanity.

God did not renew the faces of the other planets and moons in Our solar system.

Your god didn’t even know about any other planets and moons in our solar system. These are man’s discoveries.

Psalms 104:2 states that God "stretched out" the universe like a curtain.

That was the inflaton field. That's a hypothetical scalar field that is theorized to drive cosmic inflation in the very early universe.

As hypothetical as the inflation field is there is way more evidence for its existence than there is for the existence of your god.

I have much more Biblical evidence for a renewal of Earth, but what I have given should be ample.

Even as crazy as they are already, you realize that no one else in creationism believes in any of the rest of your crap, right?

And BTW, your bible, that long embellished re-telling of local fairy tales from a 3000 year-old tribe of goat herders, is not evidence of anything … ever. Even the most mundane statements in your crazy book, like the existence of sand, needs independent corroboration before it can be considered evidence. And frankly, it is the independent resources that will be considered as evidence not your useless supposititious bible.

Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.


Factio Republicana delenda est.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1382 by candle2, posted 05-03-2020 11:22 AM candle2 has taken no action

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 6737
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 1426 of 2059 (876951)
05-30-2020 5:28 PM
Reply to: Message 1421 by dad
05-30-2020 5:01 PM


Re: bogus claim on the age of the earth being in the bible
This is a science forum and you use it to recite foolish old wives tales that are blasphemous?

This is a science thread. There cannot be any such thing as blasphemy.

Blasphemy is a religious stupidity to stifle other religious opinions. It holds no place in a science thread.

Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.


Factio Republicana delenda est.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1421 by dad, posted 05-30-2020 5:01 PM dad has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1437 by dad, posted 06-01-2020 3:32 AM AZPaul3 has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 6737
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 1439 of 2059 (876990)
06-01-2020 5:28 AM
Reply to: Message 1437 by dad
06-01-2020 3:32 AM


Re: bogus claim on the age of the earth being in the bible
If all you offered was fact and knowledge rather than diss Scripture that may be the case.

Can't disrespect something that has no respect to diss. Religion is the greatest evil ever to infect the mind of humanity. Your scripture is evil in thought and deed. It is lie masquerading as truth to enslave the mind.

There is no utility for humanity, there is no relevance to reality, there is no good for the world in your scripture or your religion. There is nothing but blood, pain and death in its words. Enslavement is its goal.

Your book is nothing but an excuse to subjugate the people, enrich your priests and to kill the minds of the children. Your own conception of your god is as a bloodthirsty monster with the entrails of the innocent still in its teeth.

Your scripture is evil and is condemned to be ignored and forgotten. It means nothing. It deserves nothing ... especially respect.

Now, getting back to the subject ...

What makes you think "the nature" changed some time in the past?

We say it has not changed because we have no evidence that it coulda, shoulda, woulda at anytime in the last 13.7 billion years.

If you have evidence that it coulda, shoulda, woulda, then present it ...

or ...

STFU!

Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.


Factio Republicana delenda est.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1437 by dad, posted 06-01-2020 3:32 AM dad has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1463 by dad, posted 06-19-2020 1:43 AM AZPaul3 has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 6737
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 1453 of 2059 (877228)
06-08-2020 6:03 PM
Reply to: Message 1452 by jar
06-08-2020 4:57 PM


Re: Comments From A Tribal Missionary To The "Other"
Question, jar.

Are these not associations of churches instead of separate cults? Couldn't a specific church belong to many of these or are these separate doctrines?


Factio Republicana delenda est.
I am antifa.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1452 by jar, posted 06-08-2020 4:57 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1454 by jar, posted 06-08-2020 6:49 PM AZPaul3 has seen this message

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 6737
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 1464 of 2059 (877598)
06-19-2020 4:00 AM
Reply to: Message 1463 by dad
06-19-2020 1:43 AM


Re: bogus claim on the age of the earth being in the bible
I don't think you have any worries about moderation here. That puke apparently is accepted in a science thread.

Yes, facts are acceptable in a science thread. And "blasphemy" can only exist in the minds of the weak. It has no reality in this universe.

As far as hatred for your beliefs ... did that sneak in there somewhere?

Gee. How in heaven's name did that happen?


Factio Republicana delenda est.
I am antifa.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1463 by dad, posted 06-19-2020 1:43 AM dad has taken no action

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 6737
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.9


(1)
Message 1481 of 2059 (877640)
06-19-2020 12:31 PM
Reply to: Message 1475 by Kleinman
06-19-2020 11:15 AM


Re: Really no hatred of your beliefs but a lot of stupidity
Thousands of mathematicians, thousands of geneticists, thousands of evolutionary biologists the world over and none of them have figured out that their ideas are all wrong.

Must be really disheartening to go through all that schooling, all those years in the lab and at the computer crunching numbers, working all those years building skills in your discipline and reputation with your colleagues just to find out some upstart internet nobody says you've been so wrong all this time.

The real hurt for you, I'm sure, is that you have to come here to EvC, to an amateur general discussion site, to push your novel views because you can't hold your own against the professionals on the dedicated discipline sites.


Factio Republicana delenda est.
I am antifa.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1475 by Kleinman, posted 06-19-2020 11:15 AM Kleinman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1483 by Kleinman, posted 06-19-2020 12:57 PM AZPaul3 has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 6737
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.9


(1)
Message 1484 of 2059 (877645)
06-19-2020 1:21 PM
Reply to: Message 1483 by Kleinman
06-19-2020 12:57 PM


Re: Really no hatred of your beliefs but a lot of stupidity
And these startling revelations of everyone but you being wrong fall on deaf ears here and everywhere you go.

That should say something to you, but your delusions are deep set, not to be moved by fact or reality.

Keep up the work, Richa ... uh ... Kleinman. No one here nor anywhere is buying your faulty logic, your errant math and your insistence on superiority. You've got a long long way to go.

BTW,

And it's the same as when the "real scientists" said the earth was flat.

The "real scientists" since before Aristotle knew the earth was round. It was your fellow delusionals that insisted otherwise in the face of what the science already knew. Just like your present contention.

Ego-driven, delusional, anti-science, anti-reality. You need to go have that looked at.


Factio Republicana delenda est.
I am antifa.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1483 by Kleinman, posted 06-19-2020 12:57 PM Kleinman has taken no action

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022