8
   

Is Atheism the New Age Religion?

 
 
fresco
 
  2  
Reply Thu 30 Jun, 2016 12:00 am
@Expert2,
"...nation of non- thinkers..." Laughing
On the contrary, of the Western Nations, only the US appears to have a significant number of people pre-occupied with creationism. To call atheistic alternatives 'a cult' is equivalent to misfits projecting the reasons for their isolation on the majority.

In previous years, I have asked US contributors why religiosity is such a 'big deal' in the States. One explanation was in terms of the history of The US as a refuge for religious non-conformists.I suggest that comparing this 'rationality' with that of the 'Gun Laws' issue would make a good PhD thesis for a social history graduate.
snood
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Jun, 2016 06:31 am
@InfraBlue,
InfraBlue wrote:

snood wrote:

Yeah... It just seems to me there doesn't have to be a fight there. I'm sure there are examples of christians that want to replace science - I just haven't personally run across any.


The OP want's to replace science with what they believe is science. He provided a link to the Institute for Creation Research.


By the time I stumbled upon this thread, the mods had removed the link from the launch thread. But reading over it it seems to me that he was advocating for including religion on the curriculum, not replacing evolution with it.
Expert2
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Jun, 2016 07:48 am
@snood,
More specifically, the Bible should be included not excluded. Excluding the Bible narrows the conversation to one group's point of view. Deleting links that offer another opinion or point of view is Censorship of Free Speech. Point made and Censorship removed link.
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Jun, 2016 11:23 am
@Expert2,
Expert2 wrote:
As professionals, teachers must be free to examine controversial issues openly in the classroom.
As a teacher for the last eight years I question this claim. All so-called "controversial issues" would by default include the freedom to examine unicorns, tooth-fairies, astrology, gods, reincarnation, resurrection, the holy trinity, and a myriad of other entirely evidence-lacking nonsense. Theses types of things can be dismissed outright and need not take up very much valuable class time (needed for the examination of evidence-based / science-based education).

Properly educate people in science, mathematics, physics, electricity, electronics, logic, , philosophy, history, biology, evolution, critical thinking, etc. and their improved critical faculties will hopefully take care of a goodly portion of the nonsense.

“The whole educational and professional training system is a very elaborate filter, which just weeds out people who are too independent, and who think for themselves, and who don't know how to be submissive, and so on -- because they're dysfunctional to the institutions.” - Noam Chomsky

“The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum....” - Noam Chomsky
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Jun, 2016 11:35 am
@Chumly,
It's a complex world where people are free to choose what they wish to believe. We already have science, mathematics, physics, electricity, electronics, logic, philosophy, history, biology, evolution, critical thinking, etc., but people will also have belief in their religion.
It's been shown that the majority of scientists do not believe in creationism. The individual makes their choice based on their upbringing and what they learn throughout their life. It's a choice.
We still don't know how our universe came into being. The Big Bang doesn't tell us much.
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Jun, 2016 12:17 pm
@snood,
The issue with these people is, specifically, their opposition to evolution and their attempt to insert ID/Creationism into science classes, not the general curriculum, as if it were science. They're not just questioning evolution. They're opposed to it on religious grounds. Their entire take on it isn't scientific.
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Jun, 2016 12:41 pm
@rosborne979,
Quote:
Public schools (at least in the US) are required to teach the subject matter of their courses. They are not required to debate the subject matter with the students. Students are expected to learn the subject matter, whether they agree with it or not.
You nailed the reason I think I hated school so much. I take it you are not a fan of the Socratic method..

That may be the way it is, but it ain't necessarily best.
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Jun, 2016 12:58 pm
@InfraBlue,
Quote:
They're not just questioning evolution. They're opposed to it on religious grounds. Their entire take on it isn't scientific.
I think you are generalizing here. I remember the questions I had In school about the difficulty in explaining abiogenesis. I didn't mention God, wasn't even thinking about that. This was long before I was aware of the debate about teaching 'creationism' in school. I was genuinly curious about the question but the teacher just gave me a disparaging look and ignored the question.

Asking about the odds of a certain chain of polypeptides organizing by chance is not being unscientific. To the contrary, it is the natural question to ask if you are scientific.
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Thu 30 Jun, 2016 01:23 pm
@Leadfoot,
the reason theyre called polypptides is what? Cuse theres more than one. And they join nose to tail by specific chemical groupings (OH,SH2,Ch3, and NH2). There are several forensic tests that allow us to bust up and reconstruct (via bucket chemistry) how these things bond and cleave.

Taking **** apart, in a lb, is just like learning car mwchanics, except, in the case of forensics, the prts "heal themselves" when alive.

Biochem always makes sense. Its like doing the pwriodic table except with carbon based compounds
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Jun, 2016 01:36 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:
...people are free to choose what they wish to believe...
Alas if only that were true:
1) I would argue there is no such thing as free will;
2) religious, cultural, political, social, economic and sexual indoctrination-prohibition preclude freedom of belief.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Jun, 2016 01:41 pm
@Chumly,
I may be an exception; all my siblings are christians, because our mother converted from buddhist to christian. I call religion "an accident of birth." Most follow the religion of their parents.
Free will is available, but not many apply it. There is no threat of physical persecution if a christian (or any religion) wishes to denounce his religion.
0 Replies
 
Leadfoot
 
  0  
Reply Thu 30 Jun, 2016 02:26 pm
@farmerman,
Quote:
Biochem always makes sense. Its like doing the pwriodic table except with carbon based compounds
Gross over simplification. There are very specific rules for combining elements on the periodic table and under what conditions.

In contrast, there is NO specific rule or preference for the order and preference in which the 4 nucleotides A,C,T and G combine.

There are only two possible explainations for how they organized into a self reproducing organism capable of evolving in prebiotic conditions.

1. Random Chance
2. Intelligent Intervention
Leadfoot
 
  2  
Reply Thu 30 Jun, 2016 02:28 pm
@Chumly,
Quote:
1) I would argue there is no such thing as free will;
I guess you had no choice about that either...
Expert2
 
  0  
Reply Thu 30 Jun, 2016 02:34 pm
@edgarblythe,
I noticed your link was never removed. Why? Your opinion is being promoted while mine was removed and being discriminated against. When you push one opinion and only one opinion is allowed to thrive, it's not democracy but totalitarianism. Brainwashing is to indoctrinate the masses by dumbing them down. If Atheism is the truth and proven by science, then why this bullying tactic? Moral or unmoral? Society is heading for an explosion of stupidness.
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  2  
Reply Thu 30 Jun, 2016 02:45 pm
@Leadfoot,
Leadfoot wrote:

Quote:
Public schools (at least in the US) are required to teach the subject matter of their courses. They are not required to debate the subject matter with the students. Students are expected to learn the subject matter, whether they agree with it or not.
You nailed the reason I think I hated school so much. I take it you are not a fan of the Socratic method..

That may be the way it is, but it ain't necessarily best.

I should have said, "They are not required to debate the VALIDITY of the subject matter with the students". Questioning and debating a subject with the intent of gaining a clearer understanding of the materials is beneficial. But there are far too many crackpot ideas out there for every student to be able to challenge the teacher with when the questions don't help foster a better understanding of the material being taught. If this tendency weren't checked students could derail the entire class every day to the detriment of the other students.

I also think the balance point shifts as students get older and are exposed to more esoteric ideas, whereas the basics of elementary and even high school subjects are not really debatable.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Jun, 2016 03:19 pm
@Leadfoot,
Quote:
In contrast, there is NO specific rule or preference for the order and preference in which the 4 nucleotides A,C,T and G combine
Bullshit. GCAT can link to themselves and G to C (only) and A to T (only)
The nucleotide is made up of 3 pqrts the trip phosphate (which is negatively mass charged and wants to STAY AWAY from everyone, and thats linked to ribose sugar, and thats linked to the N base (the ACTG guys).
The catalyse that "unzips" the n Bases from each other we talked about at length and you only stated that it was divinely inspired.

When our feeble brains understood the whole schlamaggle it was a "OY WHY DIDNT I SEE DAT FOIST".

Now ask me WHEN do DNAs decide to unzip??
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Jun, 2016 03:27 pm
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:
Bullshit. GCAT can link to themselves and G to C (only) and A to T (only)
The nucleotide is made up of 3 pqrts the trip phosphate (which is negatively mass charged and wants to STAY AWAY from everyone, and thats linked to ribose sugar, and thats linked to the N base (the ACTG guys).


That's easy for you to say.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Jun, 2016 03:28 pm
@farmerman,
PS, I can tell you how to extract the DNA from your spit to see it under a scope. All it takes is vinegar , Ammonia and some rubbing alcohol.
You will need a centrifuge , I once made one out of a blender I picked up at a yard sale and soon discovered that you only use LOW. (Otherwise you have a band of Dna and ammonium acetate and isopropanol all over the walls. about i inch wide and you can find it by spraying with ninhydrine and shining a UV light.
But thats another scienc story. I think Kids should learn all about this in grde school and quit this belief in "magic reactions" (When you understand something it becomes areal toy).

You can probably make a centrifuge out of a plane engine or a lettuce spinner(which ever is more available)
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Jun, 2016 03:30 pm
@izzythepush,
I don't understand that "nucleotide" stuff, but I trust farmerman's judgement about that topic.
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Jun, 2016 03:32 pm
@cicerone imposter,
I wouldn't wash my whites in anything else.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 07/03/2020 at 08:38:26