Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9077 total)
98 online now:
Aussie, dwise1, PaulK, ringo, Tangle, Tanypteryx (6 members, 92 visitors)
Newest Member: Contrarian
Post Volume: Total: 894,045 Year: 5,157/6,534 Month: 0/577 Week: 68/135 Day: 0/8 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why not teach problems with ToE in school?
Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 37 of 136 (126027)
07-20-2004 5:52 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by tubi417
07-18-2004 3:02 AM


Re: Problems of evolution taught in school
quote:
I don't understand why many of you are against having the problems of evolution taught.

We aren't against it. However, we are against teaching falsehoods in science class. Let's go over the ones you listed.

quote:
Some of the problems we've learned were about how mutations are generally harmful and that they never been known to add new information.

Firstly, the fact that harmful and neutral mutations outweigh the number of beneficial mutations is not a problem for the theory of evolution. Because of natural selection, harmful mutations are weeded out of the population, beneficial mutations spread throughout the population, and neutral mutations spread randomly through the population. Hence, there is no problem. However, there is a huge problem with your teacher's understanding of the mechanisms involved in the theory of evolution.

Secondly, mutations DO add new information to the genome. Take the nylong bug for example. A mutation in the bacteria caused the creation of a brand new enzyme that was able to digest nylon derivatives found in nylon factories. A new enzyme is new information, and it was caused by a mutation. This supposed problem actually doesn't exist, and I am starting to wonder if you created a fictional classroom here.

quote:
We learned about how it would be impossible for life to really come from nothing.

Firstly, evolution says nothing about how life originated.

Secondly, not one scientist claims that life arose out of nothing. Instead, they claim that life arose through chemical reactions on earth. Molecules and chemical reactions are not "nothing". Again, I am very suspicious that this classroom curiculum is non-existant given the poor understanding of science that went into it.

quote:
We also learned about how there are problems with the apes that are supposed to link them with humans, although I don't remember what exactly we went over, I will try to find my notes.

The scientific community has no problems with these fossils. The only objections I have ever heard is from creationists with degrees in electrical engineering. And even then, the problems they have with these fossils stems with the conflict between real data and their interpretation of Genesis, really not the best scientific argument I have ever heard.

{quoteWe weren't taught about how god or the Bible could explain anything because we can't deal with religion in school, although I feel evoltuion is pretty much religion.[/quote]

Firstly, you also weren't taught about how Vishnu, Zeus, Odin, or the Great Spirit could explain anything either.

Secondly, evolution is taught in public science classrooms because it is areligious. It makes no statements about any religion. Evolution is based on evidence, it's theories are cosistent with all objective observations, and evolution is falsified by none of it. Not once in the last sentence did I have to insert a diety. Why is that? Maybe because evolution is not a religion?

quote:
I think its really good that were taught that this theory isn't solid fact, like so many people make it out to be.

And those people that claim evolution is a solid, undeniable fact are not offering a scientific opinion. They are pushing science beyond what it is capable of doing. However, evolution is so well supported that scientists base their work on it, and work well it does. Name one scientist using creationism today that has made an earth shattering discovery. The answer is none. According to you, we should abandon a model that works for one that doesn't work. Sounds ludicrous to me.

quote:
So whats the problem with learning both sides to the argument????

Nothing. I have learned quite a bit about creationists and their theories over the last few years. The problem is presenting this in a science class of impressionable youths, therefore giving the impression that creationism has a leg to stand on when in fact it is only supported by religious faith. However, creationism would be fine if it was included in a comparative religions course.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by tubi417, posted 07-18-2004 3:02 AM tubi417 has taken no action

Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 42 of 136 (126125)
07-20-2004 11:57 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by tubi417
07-20-2004 11:44 PM


Re: Lies????
You can also go here for a list of his lies (300 at last count). It is a tough job to keep up with the BS he puts out. I think people gave up after 300.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by tubi417, posted 07-20-2004 11:44 PM tubi417 has taken no action

Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 52 of 136 (126596)
07-22-2004 12:52 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by Jasonb
07-22-2004 12:03 PM


Re: Problems of evolution taught in school
quote:
To the Atheists:
Imagine if your child one day came home from school with a Bible, issued by his science teacher, and told you he had to read Genesis 1 for homework. You call the school and the principle informs you that they have abandoned all teachings on evolution an adopted a Christian-Creation curriculum on the origins of man and the universe.

If creation were true, then it wouldn't be necessary to even assign the Bible as homework. Instead, you would simply have to present the objective evidence that supports a six day creation 6,000 years ago. Science is about theories that are supported by the evidence and falsified by none of it. If creationism fit that bill it would be taught in science class regardless of it's religious connotations, and without any mention of the theories etiology.

quote:
Why are you not angry? Why are you not outraged? The above scenario happened to us.

No, it didn't. Only a literal Genesis was shown to be wrong, and not even by evolution. The theory of creationism was falsified by the evidence, not by another theory. Once a scientific theory is falsified it is no longer appropriate to teach it in a science class. However, the Bible is as true today as it was 2,000 years ago. It is only a literal reading of Genesis that is wrong.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Jasonb, posted 07-22-2004 12:03 PM Jasonb has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by Jasonb, posted 07-22-2004 3:01 PM Loudmouth has taken no action

Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 56 of 136 (126618)
07-22-2004 1:46 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by Jasonb
07-22-2004 1:19 PM


Re: Problems of evolution taught in school
quote:
The question was ‘Why not teach problems with ToE in schools.’ And I m attempting, no comments on how effective please, to answer that from a creationists, remember my definitions, point of view.

And our suggestions were that the "problems" that creationists want taught are not, in fact, problems. This is the problem with creationists, they have to rely on lies in order to push their political movement forward. Creationism is not a scientific movement, it is a political movement that is trying to have religion inserted into public education. Evolution is the study of objective evidence, and the theories that best explain the evidence. Until someone is able devise theories that include God that better explain the evidence, then evolution will continue to be taught. Until anyone is able to produce evidence that evolution is wrong, then it will continue to be taught. The only problems in evolution are the gaps in our knowledge. This is the reason science is still taught, so future generations can learn solid, scientific methodologies and fill in those gaps of knowledge. Please tell me how reading the Bible has ever increased our knowledge of the natrual world.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Jasonb, posted 07-22-2004 1:19 PM Jasonb has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by Jasonb, posted 07-22-2004 3:15 PM Loudmouth has replied

Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 65 of 136 (126679)
07-22-2004 3:49 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by Jasonb
07-22-2004 3:15 PM


Re: Problems of evolution taught in school
quote:
I don’t think it will help our fundamental cause, and that is to win our children to Christ. I think it causes confusion.

Do you think it helps the fundamentalist cause to teach a falsified theory to children? Creationism has been falsified by the evidence, not by evolution. Many christians have left the faith because of the lies that creationists put out. They soon realize that if their faith relies on a literal translation of Genesis, and the only way to support that translation is lies, then their faith is a lie as well. Requiring that all christians believe in a literal Genesis will only drive people away from the church, not bring them into the fold. Christians have come a long way, such as their adoption of heliocentrism. It seems that evolution is yet another hurdle they have to cross. Given that many denominations now accept natural evolution, it seems that the fundamentalist christian movement is lagging a bit.

Evolution is the theory that best fits the evidence we have on hand. It could be falsified tomorrow, or never. However, it is the theory that is driving research in the biological sciences, and so to do well in those fields you have to understand the theory. There are gaps in our understandings of chemistry and physics, but we still require children to learn about those godless, areligious theories as well (and with no gripe from fundies, how strange). Even some of the great christian scientists (eg Isaac Newton) kept references of God out of their theories. Evolution is no different.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Jasonb, posted 07-22-2004 3:15 PM Jasonb has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by CK, posted 07-22-2004 3:51 PM Loudmouth has replied

Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 68 of 136 (126683)
07-22-2004 3:52 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by CK
07-22-2004 3:49 PM


Re: Problems of evolution taught in school
quote:
Remember over the water (The UK), creationism is seen as a strange abberation by the vast majority of Christians.

I said this in another thread, and I will say it again. Everyday the Brits look smarter for kicking the Puritans across the pond. The Mayflower, it seems, extended the last vestiges of the Dark Ages into our pseudo-modern American culture. I am just waiting for the next round of witch trials. Do you think they will keep the witches in Guantanamo Bay?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by CK, posted 07-22-2004 3:49 PM CK has taken no action

Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 69 of 136 (126686)
07-22-2004 3:57 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by CK
07-22-2004 3:51 PM


Re: Problems of evolution taught in school
quote:
That's actually what happened to me - I asked questions, people told me lies and I thought "hold on a minute!"

That's what happened to me as well. Luckily, I was able to realize that it was a relationship between me and God, not me and Genesis. I was able to reconcile science and religion rather easily. I did leave the faith, but it was for reasons other than the creation v evolution debate. However, it does make me cringe to hear young kids (16 and under) parroting those old arguments like "The sun is shrinking" or "how about that moon dust". I worry because it is only a matter of time before those arguments paint them into a corner that will threaten their faith. I have never wanted science to determine one's spiritual faith, even if I don't agree with their religious views.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by CK, posted 07-22-2004 3:51 PM CK has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by Jasonb, posted 07-22-2004 4:33 PM Loudmouth has taken no action

Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 77 of 136 (126725)
07-22-2004 5:08 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by Robert Byers
07-22-2004 4:45 PM


Re: Problems of evolution taught in school
quote:
Tyranny.

Christianity had it's chance. Remember the Dark Ages, the Inquisition? These were times when the chruch subdued anything that they deemed was heresy, including that the earth orbited the sun. Luckily for us, evidence instead of blind faith won out.

quote:
The reason evolutionists don't want evolution questioned or discussed in schools is because they have a higher agenda of fighting Christianity and its influence in society. They are still in combat with the Protestant origins of the country.

So you are saying that christian scientists are out to stop christianity? You do realize that there are thousands and thousands of practicing evolutionistary scientists who go to church on a very regular basis. Do you think these christians are trying to tear down their own faith? Your hatred has blinded you to your fellow christians.

quote:
Also of coarse they since they insist evolution is the truth they can't allow doubt to be credible even though 50% of the population doesn't accept evolution

Science has no problem with doubters, but they must use objective evidence in order to be taken seriously. That, and science is not supposed to mirror public opinion, only what the data shows.

quote:
This is about bigger issues then the origins of the world

Yes, it is about a christian minority wanting their translation of the Bible to be more important than what God has shown us through his creation. It isn't about the truth, it is about fundamentalists feeling important.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Robert Byers, posted 07-22-2004 4:45 PM Robert Byers has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by Robert Byers, posted 07-24-2004 4:38 PM Loudmouth has replied

Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 88 of 136 (127779)
07-26-2004 12:28 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by Robert Byers
07-24-2004 4:38 PM


Re: Problems of evolution taught in school
quote:
Loudmouth. Christianity is the source of all that is right in the world. For wxapmle America.

I wouldn't say that Christianity is the source of ALL that is right, but it is a source of loving, sharing people. This is not in doubt. However, their ability to trust fellow christians is taken advantage of through the outright fabrications that creationists use to support their position. Young Earth Creationism is just one example of bad things coming from the church. Requiring that a christian accept YECism seriously jeopardizes their faith.

quote:
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.

And they are just as wrong for using evolution to disprove christianity as christians using the Bible to disprove science. Can you look in any scientific journal, textbook, or conference and find the theory within science that requires people to abandon christianity? The theory of evolution is an explanation of earth's natural history derived from objective, repeatable, falsifiable evidence. It says nothing about which gods you should worhsip, nor does it require you to abandon all religious faith. I, for one, hope that no one on this site loses their faith because of what is posted. However, pinning your faith on a literal Genesis is very dangerous, and (in my opinion) poor theology. God said to worship Him, not the Bible. Using lies to support the Bible is not worsphipping God, but worshipping man's works.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Robert Byers, posted 07-24-2004 4:38 PM Robert Byers has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by Robert Byers, posted 07-26-2004 2:49 PM Loudmouth has replied

Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 93 of 136 (127843)
07-26-2004 3:10 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by Robert Byers
07-26-2004 2:49 PM


Re: Problems of evolution taught in school
quote:
In America the Protestant faith has a foundation,repeat foundation,insisted and still a great deal insists that genesis is true and important to the Christian redemption story.

And some insist that Genesis should not be taken literally. Who should I believe, those that lie to support their theories or those that accept what is found in God's Creation? It would seem that the christians who have to lie in order to support their translation of the Bible are in error.

quote:
When people talk about the history of the rise of evolution it is always said that it replaced beliefs stemming from the Bible. ALWAYS.

The Earth orbiting the Sun was one such scientific finding that directly contradicted the accepted translation of the Bible. In the end, christians decided that God's Creation was more accurate that Man's Translation. Evolution is another theory in a long line of scientific theories that christianity has had a problem with. Maybe you should also be complaining about a round earth and heliocentrism going against christianity.

quote:
Of coarse a Christian can get around it but such a person is in error.

And they claim that you are in error. Who am I to believe? Perhaps you should check and see what God wrote in the Creation.

quote:
And then the government steps in and says the historical and thriving Christian doctrine is not permissable on state property because of separation of church/state.

And rightly so. This is the only way that religious freedom can remain, if the government is totally separated from it's creation and it's practice. Don't forget that our the founding of this country can be traced back to the Puritans, who were themselves persecuted for their religious beliefs by the State. The founding fathers wanted to prevent this, so they established a separation of church and state.

quote:
"It is error alone which needs support of government. Truth can stand by itself."

Which is why science is supported by it's evidence, not the government. If creationism was included in schools it would only be because of the demands of the populace (government), not the demands of scientific endeavors. The truth of evolution comes from the evidence, not the support of blind faith.

quote:
Today the government suppresses a commonly held belief about origins. WHY?

It doesn't. It just isn't part of a public school program which is inherently areligious. If you want to teach your kids about creationism you are free to do so. The government is not suppressing creationism, only keeping it where it belongs, as part of people's religious faith.

quote:
A true believer in science would never censor questioning on the merits of some claim of science.

And science doesn't. However, if you are going to make a claim it must be supported by objective evidence and not contradicted by it. What is wrong with that requirement? If creationism is true then it shouldn't be a problem. If creationism is true, then we should see creationist predictions being born out by new information. If creationism is true, then creationists would not have to rely on theories derived from zero evidence. If creationism is true, then we wouldn't find observations that falsify creationism. Evolution has nothing to do with replacing creationism, it only filled the void after creationism was found to be false.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by Robert Byers, posted 07-26-2004 2:49 PM Robert Byers has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by Robert Byers, posted 07-27-2004 3:18 PM Loudmouth has replied

Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 95 of 136 (128089)
07-27-2004 1:20 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by crashfrog
07-27-2004 1:18 AM


quote:
Read the list. 300 Steves employed in fields relevant to evolution.

Actually, the Steve-o-Meter is at 434 as of May 3, 2004.

And just to reiterate, there are three requirements. First, your name has to be Steve or Stephen (and I think Stevarinos are allowed as well). The second requirement is that you have to be working in a field that is related or governed by the theory of evolution. From the sites FAQ:

About two thirds are biologists. (There are, unsurprisingly, few biologists to be found on the creationist lists.) Most are scientists; there are a few borderline cases (economists, philosophers, psychologists, science educators, medical researchers, computer scientists, and so forth). Nearly all are Ph.D.s; there are a few M.D.s and Ed.D.s.

The third requirement is that you agree that the following statement is accurate and applies to education:

Evolution is a vital, well-supported, unifying principle of the biological sciences, and the scientific evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the idea that all living things share a common ancestry. Although there are legitimate debates about the patterns and processes of evolution, there is no serious scientific doubt that evolution occurred or that natural selection is a major mechanism in its occurrence. It is scientifically inappropriate and pedagogically irresponsible for creationist pseudoscience, including but not limited to "intelligent design," to be introduced into the science curricula of our nation's public schools.

This message has been edited by Loudmouth, 07-27-2004 12:21 PM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by crashfrog, posted 07-27-2004 1:18 AM crashfrog has taken no action

Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 99 of 136 (128186)
07-27-2004 6:57 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by Robert Byers
07-27-2004 3:18 PM


Re: Problems of evolution taught in school
quote:
In fact you agreed with my point, I think, that evolution is always taught with the point it replaced previous Bible beliefs.

Not so, it filled the void left after creationism was falsified. Creationism, as portrayed in a literal Genesis, was falsified before either Wallace or Darwin published their works. However, Darwin himself still believed that God was the creator, just not as God was portrayed in Genesis.

quote:
There is a separation of church/state.
This separation is the justification to censor creationist teachings or criticisms.

And if creationism was solely based on scientific data, and consistent with all of the data, then it would be taught in science class. However, don't blame evolution because your theories don't match up with the evidence, and that the sole support for creationism is blind, religious faith. Also, the criticisms, as I demonstrated earlier in this thread, are spurious and not worth the pixels they are printed with. Again, it is the job of the science department to teach the theory of evolution so that kids won't fall for pseudo-scientific lies like those found in creationist literature.

quote:
SINCE origins are taught that reject the Bible/Christian doctrine then this is the STATE saying they are false.

And if the State were to be fair, we would spend five to six semesters teaching the ins and outs of every creation story in existence for every culture to ever exist. However, this is a science class, not a comparative religions course. If you want creationism in you have to make it scientifically accurate, not religiously and theologically consistent with christian dogma. And the state is saying that young earth creationism is false, but not christianity. The one does not rest on the other, only you have made a literal Genesis a requisite for being a christian.

quote:
This is an easy equation to understand. Either you refute it as it is or honestly admit its decisive force.

It is a decisive force that keeps pseudoscience and lies out of school science curiculums. It can only improve the education of this countries children towards developing new and better technologies. (31 words)

quote:
I can't see where my reasoning is wrong

You are wrong in that the State is falsifying christianity. The State is only upholding scientific findings that falsify a literal interpretation of Genesis. It is not the fault of the State that scientific findings caused the falsification of a literal Genesis, but rather the fault of those interpreting Genesis in a way that contradicts the realities of the natural world. The State has not set out to squelch religious conversation, only to uphold the accuracy of scientific findings regardless of their religious implications.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Robert Byers, posted 07-27-2004 3:18 PM Robert Byers has taken no action

Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 100 of 136 (128187)
07-27-2004 7:00 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by CK
07-27-2004 6:12 PM


Re: Problems of evolution taught in school
quote:
not my country pal - we keep that sort of rubbish out of the class room (expect for one regretable incident).

And we would export our fundies if it weren't the exceptionally high British Tariffs. Somehow Canda figured out a way to scare them into staying here. Hopefully we can con Mexico into taking a few here and there through NAFTA.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by CK, posted 07-27-2004 6:12 PM CK has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by coffee_addict, posted 07-31-2004 1:33 AM Loudmouth has taken no action

Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 114 of 136 (130030)
08-03-2004 2:15 PM
Reply to: Message 112 by Robert Byers
08-03-2004 1:50 PM


Re: Problems of evolution taught in school
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.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by Robert Byers, posted 08-03-2004 1:50 PM Robert Byers 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