Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 52 (9179 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Happy Birthday: Theodoric
Post Volume: Total: 918,150 Year: 5,407/9,624 Month: 432/323 Week: 72/204 Day: 14/34 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Should we teach both evolution and religion in school?
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 911 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


(2)
Message 91 of 2073 (573862)
08-12-2010 10:10 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by archaeologist
08-12-2010 9:41 PM


The reason I used Bill Nye and Mr. Wizard was to prove that the scientific method is not something that is limited to an "elite few", but rather, something that is open to ANYONE. Your accusation of two individuals who have done great things in showing children just how fun science can be is despicable. Perhaps the only critique on either of them is on Bill Nye and how some accused him of "selling out", which has ABSOLUTELY ZERO bearing on his credibility as a scientist or his knowledge of scientific subjects he speaks on. My guess is you don't even know who either of them are or what they have done. Science is fun and these two made it that much more so.
You lie and just make shit up. You have a 40 post count and have yet to do anything but bitch, complain, cry, lie, project. You are in the science section of this forum. You, in my opinion, have not yet been banned strictly because you will run back to your creo-fucktard friends crying about how EvC is unfair to creo-fucktards. You should feel privileged for not having been banned yet. Sure, I went with a personal attack, but hey, I'm a fucking prick and idiots need to be told they are idiots. You are a mockery of sentient beings the universe over.
Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.

"A still more glorious dawn awaits
Not a sunrise, but a galaxy rise
A morning filled with 400 billion suns
The rising of the milky way"
-Carl Sagan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by archaeologist, posted 08-12-2010 9:41 PM archaeologist has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10191
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.1


(1)
Message 92 of 2073 (573866)
08-12-2010 10:18 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by archaeologist
08-12-2010 8:27 PM


your reaction to contradiction is normal because no one likes to feel that their chosen authority is wrong and does things the wrong way. your reactions are all very emotional and unscientific.
My chosen authority is reality. What is yours?
hypothesis: guns and bullets may kill people.
I thought christians didn't make predictions?
What are you saying? That in order to see if something is true you make a prediction and then test it? Really? That's not what you said before:
"the idea of 'predicitions is just anothe rtool to lead people away from the truth."
That is what you said, and yet here you are making a prediction. Are you trying to lead people away from the truth? And where did you insert God into your hypothesis? Are you now using secular science?
you do not need to be a scientist to learn about or experiment with something.
But you do need the scientific method, something which you reject.
this is the reason i do not take most of you seriously, my quoted article was written in 2001 and it is just plain common sense to think that in the last 9 years a machine could have been invented to measure such small items BUT it doesn't change the fact that scientists do not follow their own rules {and fib about their discoveries} and i doubt they do now even with all their new machinery.
How else, but through scientific investigation, could you claim the following?
"With more than 300 million measurements, the astronomers discovered ripples of matter near the edge of the universe. How did they know this? The measurements were all of temperature taken by sensors pointed in different directions from the earth. In averaging the 300 million measurements, astronomers found a temperature difference in different parts ofthe universe. How big was the difference? One report stated 30 millionths of one degree; another said 10 millionths of one degree.
The study cost $400 million and 28 years of work by many scientists. Shortly after the announcement there came an embarrassed silence. Apparently there is no instrument in the world that can measure such an infinitesimal difference. Presumably a gnat flying across a sensor 100 miles distant would create a greater temperature difference. All that had evidently happened in the study was averaging an almost infinite number of meaningless measurement errors."
Did you use science to figure this out, or did God tell you about this in the Bible? Even more, I don't see anywhere in the quote where you used God to explain the sensitivity of the equipment that they used. Are you using secular science again?
face it, science is rife with those who do not do things the scientific method . . .
Why do you care, since you reject the method anyway?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by archaeologist, posted 08-12-2010 8:27 PM archaeologist has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10191
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 93 of 2073 (573869)
08-12-2010 10:22 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by archaeologist
08-12-2010 8:36 PM


no,it is not false, you just want it to be.
Then show us a supernatural hypothesis and the experiments which verified it.
you hide behind your tests and refuse to check the honesty of them or if you have the right questions or attitude.
Why do you care, since you reject the scientific method anyway?
you forget the mitigating factors like peer jealousy, peer fabrication and you have forgotten to learn your lessons from the myriad of hoaxes that plaque the evolutionary field.
How can you determine if something is a hoax without applying the scientific method, a method that you reject?
the truth never changes, one may discover it but it has always been the truth from the beginning.
Need I quote christians from the past who said that the Bible supported a solar system where the Sun orbited the Earth?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by archaeologist, posted 08-12-2010 8:36 PM archaeologist has not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2216 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(1)
Message 94 of 2073 (573894)
08-13-2010 12:49 AM
Reply to: Message 82 by archaeologist
08-12-2010 8:27 PM


Wrong once again
take for example the field of archaeology. the majority of its discoveries come from normal non-profressional people not the professional archaeologist who has spent years studying ancient languages and his/her field.
Absolutely wrong! Particularly so in areas where there is no monumental architecture or major ruins, or no rock art.
Many of the finds in some areas may be made by non-professionals, but the discoveries that advance the archaeological profession are not so often made in the field, and are rarely made by non-professionals. In the field you may excavate some nice artifacts and features, and in some areas run across ruins or rock art or whatever. But you are confusing finds with meaningful increases in knowledge. Finds by themselves lack context, and are of limited use.
The true discoveries are made by figuring out what those finds mean. The finds are only a means to an end, and that end is knowledge. You need to study the finds, date them, perform any of several hundred tests on them, or devise some new tests, correlate all of the results with each other and with results from other finds and other areas. They you can place those finds in a context and give them meaning. Only when you have some context will you have a good idea what the particular find means and will have contributed to our knowledge of the past.
Perhaps you should study some archaeology before pretending to be one.
(And yes, I know there are different kinds of archaeology and methods vary from area to area.)

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by archaeologist, posted 08-12-2010 8:27 PM archaeologist has not replied

  
Kapyong
Member (Idle past 3552 days)
Posts: 344
Joined: 05-22-2003


(2)
Message 95 of 2073 (573904)
08-13-2010 2:26 AM
Reply to: Message 75 by archaeologist
08-12-2010 8:00 PM


Gday,
archaeologist writes:
no i didn't as i was specifically refering to the gap between origin and copies.
Then why did you specifically start your comment with there being 5000 manuscripts ?
If the gap between our copies and the original versions is what matters, then consider some works for which we have the original copies :
What about egyptian writings in stone? We have ORIGINAL copies.
Does having the actual original carved stone copy of a story about Isis and Osiris argue for it being true?
Of course not.
What about the Book of Mormon?
We have very early copies, possibly even the original manuscript.
Does that argue for the Book of Mormon being true?
Of course not.
What about Scientology?
We have the original writings of L.Ron Hubbard.
We have actual video of him teachings.
We have many certain direct eye-witness accounts of him.
Does that have ANYTHING to do with it being true?
Of course not.
Having early copies, even having ORIGINAL copies, (or having a large number of copies) has NOTHING to do with whether a book is true or not.
Can you please explain why you think it does?
Thanks :-)
Kapyong
Edited by Kapyong, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by archaeologist, posted 08-12-2010 8:00 PM archaeologist has not replied

  
archaeologist
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 96 of 2073 (573912)
08-13-2010 5:06 AM


i was going to reply to the preceeding few posts but since they ignore the rules and make false accusations i will ignore them. there is no point in discussing issues with those whose only defense is 'you lie'.
it is not scientific, it is not academic and it certainly is very rude. the so called other archaeologist knows full well that the best and most discoveries come from unprofessionals but he seems to be the jealous type, like eric cline, and tries to hide that fact.
to name a couple such discoveries, the dead sea scrolls, the nag hammadi library and the list continues. it is very clear that the anti-biblical crowd ignores all the rules they want to hold me to which is why they cannot achieve the goal posted by the admin.
if he can't keep them in line then he should not try and keep creationists in line for a double standard and hypocrisy ruins everything he is trying to do and destroys the credibility of his forum.
if science disagrees with the Bible then science is wrong.

Replies to this message:
 Message 98 by Huntard, posted 08-13-2010 5:11 AM archaeologist has replied

  
archaeologist
Inactive Member


Message 97 of 2073 (573914)
08-13-2010 5:10 AM


if evolutionuists and atheists want evolution in the classroom then they need to remove it from the science labs and into general history.
there are too many questions that they cannot answer, nor will they ever be able to answer which disqualifies their theory from being considered legitimate and a viable option to creation as found in Gen. 1 &2.
i would post those questions here but i am sure they would get the same non-scientific and rude responses i have been getting all along.
if the anti-biblical people can't follow their own rules they have no business being involved in any discussion

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by jar, posted 08-13-2010 9:36 AM archaeologist has not replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2405 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 98 of 2073 (573915)
08-13-2010 5:11 AM
Reply to: Message 96 by archaeologist
08-13-2010 5:06 AM


archaeologist writes:
if science disagrees with the Bible then science is wrong.
Here, let me fix that for you: "When science disagrees with the bible, the bible is wrong".
Or would you like us to believe that the earth has corners, that bats are birds or that the earth can stop spinning and this doesn't destroy everything on it, among other things?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by archaeologist, posted 08-13-2010 5:06 AM archaeologist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by archaeologist, posted 08-13-2010 6:02 AM Huntard has replied

  
archaeologist
Inactive Member


Message 99 of 2073 (573923)
08-13-2010 6:02 AM
Reply to: Message 98 by Huntard
08-13-2010 5:11 AM


Or would you like us to believe that the earth has corners, that bats are birds or that the earth can stop spinning and this doesn't destroy everything on it, among other things?
the bible never teaches that the earth has corners, where does it say the earth stopped spinning? you will need to provide chapter and verse to show the actual teaching of those ideas.
Here, let me fix that for you: "When science disagrees with the bible, the bible is wrong".
very funny, well a little funny but not correct. science is a fallible field, prone to the sin and corruption that entered the world at adam's sin and run by men under the same curse and deals with limited an dmanipulated data, deceived thinking and much more.
it would not be wise to listen to science when those same men could care less about you and were not present when the world was created. it is impossible for secular science to determine what happened 2,000 years ago let alone last week so they cannot say what took place when the universe originated. especially when they leave God out of the picture.
in all of the experiments conducted , post those with links that have actual observation of the actual event. hypothesis and modern day experiments do not cut it for the conditions are different and their conclusions would be off.
Edited by archaeologist, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Huntard, posted 08-13-2010 5:11 AM Huntard has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by Huntard, posted 08-13-2010 7:24 AM archaeologist has replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2405 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 100 of 2073 (573933)
08-13-2010 7:24 AM
Reply to: Message 99 by archaeologist
08-13-2010 6:02 AM


archaeologist writes:
the bible never teaches that the earth has corners
Sure it does, Isaiah 11:12:
quote:
And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.
where does it say the earth stopped spinning?
Well, Joshua 10:13 says this:
quote:
The sun stood still, and the moon stayed, Until the nation had avenged themselves of their enemies. Isn't this written in the book of Jashar? The sun stayed in the midst of the sky, and didn't hurry to go down about a whole day.
If the sun didn't move, the earth must have stopped spinning. Or do you think the sun goes around the earth, like this also seems to indicate?
you will need to provide chapter and verse to show the actual teaching of those ideas.
I just did. Remember, you said the bible is right and science is wrong, meaning you will have to accept the fact that the earth has corners, and bats are birds.
very funny, well a little funny but not correct.
No, it is correct.
science is a fallible field, prone to the sin and corruption that entered the world at adam's sin and run by men under the same curse and deals with limited an dmanipulated data, deceived thinking and much more.
So is the bible, being written by fallible men.
it would not be wise to listen to science when those same men could care less about you and were not present when the world was created.
Well, no one was, so I fail to see the relevance.
it is impossible for secular science to determine what happened 2,000 years ago let alone last week so they cannot say what took place when the universe originated.
Of course it is, just like it is possible to know what happened when a murder victim is found, and the police investigate. Are you telling me we shoul d let all the murderers go, afterall, according to you, we can;t be sure about events in the past.
especially when they leave God out of the picture.
Would you care to lay down a method that includes god when doing science. When I drop something, how do I put god into my observation of the dropping item? When I see someone get sic because of germs, how do I observe god in those germs?
in all of the experiments conducted , post those with links that have actual observation of the actual event.
Guess we should let those murderers go, how many observation of "the actual event" of the murder are there?
hypothesis and modern day experiments do not cut it for the conditions are different and their conclusions would be off.
Evidence the conditions were different?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by archaeologist, posted 08-13-2010 6:02 AM archaeologist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by archaeologist, posted 08-14-2010 12:25 AM Huntard has not replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34136
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 101 of 2073 (573957)
08-13-2010 9:36 AM
Reply to: Message 97 by archaeologist
08-13-2010 5:10 AM


archaeologist writes:
there are too many questions that they cannot answer, nor will they ever be able to answer which disqualifies their theory from being considered legitimate and a viable option to creation as found in Gen. 1 &2.
Yet more untruths.
First the myths in Genesis 1 & 2 are mutually exclusive; if one is true then the other is false. Second, even if true they tell us absolutely nothing about how life was created. Third, Evolution and the Theory of Evolution are not even related to the subject of how life began; that is the area called Abiogenesis.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by archaeologist, posted 08-13-2010 5:10 AM archaeologist has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 102 of 2073 (573960)
08-13-2010 9:44 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by archaeologist
08-12-2010 5:24 AM


you do realize that micro-evolution does not exist, right?
So different breeds of dogs don't exist? A figment of our imagination?

"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by archaeologist, posted 08-12-2010 5:24 AM archaeologist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 104 by archaeologist, posted 08-14-2010 12:42 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
archaeologist
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 103 of 2073 (574095)
08-14-2010 12:25 AM
Reply to: Message 100 by Huntard
08-13-2010 7:24 AM


If the sun didn't move, the earth must have stopped spinning. Or do you think the sun goes around the earth, like this also seems to indicate?
so you think God is so weak He could not keep everything as it should be until the sun started moving again? miracles cannot be analyzed by science and science cannot pass judgment upon mirales because it does not understand them nor wants to. the problem lies not with the biblical passage but with science and those who participate in its field.
that is the way it is with the supernatural it does not go according to earthly or scientific logic , thinking or rules. which is why faith with discernment is very important because science doesn't have the answers and is too limited in its scope. science cannot dictate to God, God dictates to science--my ways are not your waysis a very good clue in understanding how futile relying on science is.
God can do what He wants with the earth and science cannot claim otherwise, if the world stopped spinning then it stopped spinning and God protected everyone or gravity doesn't depend upon the earth spinning and since science cannot figure out how gravity works, it is best if it refrained from speaking on the subject. {The Final Theory pg.15}
the passage does not indicate that the sun revolves around the earth, it just means that the writer of joshua used words that everyone can understand and they are the same words we use today in everyday life. i wouldn't read into what you do not understand.
Edited by archaeologist, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by Huntard, posted 08-13-2010 7:24 AM Huntard has not replied

  
archaeologist
Inactive Member


(2)
Message 104 of 2073 (574098)
08-14-2010 12:42 AM
Reply to: Message 102 by Hyroglyphx
08-13-2010 9:44 AM


So different breeds of dogs don't exist? A figment of our imagination?
that is not micro-evolution at work but reproduction within one's kind and inside the boundaries of genetic rules and design. secularists cannot conceive of the varieties that God has implanted in His designs or the possibilities the genes He created can carryout.
{p.s. the book i have been reading on genes is called Genome and a link to the falsifying of DNA is here:
Lab creates fake DNA evidence - Scientific American Blog Network
and if you want more then go to this link:
http://search.yahoo.com/..._ylt=AuTcJAU9LMGmKl2OvE6Dqr.evZx4

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-13-2010 9:44 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by bluescat48, posted 08-14-2010 1:14 AM archaeologist has replied

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4299 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 105 of 2073 (574103)
08-14-2010 1:14 AM
Reply to: Message 104 by archaeologist
08-14-2010 12:42 AM


that is not micro-evolution at work but reproduction
Reproduction is micro-evolution. When man A mates with Woman B and produces Child C, C gets half of its chromosomes from A and half from B therefore is different from either thus descent with modification which is called evolution.

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002
Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969
Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by archaeologist, posted 08-14-2010 12:42 AM archaeologist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 106 by archaeologist, posted 08-14-2010 3:40 AM bluescat48 has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024