Evolution - Who wants to KNOW?

I am sure science has supplanted religion for many people. However, this is the reason creationists use in asking for equal time in public schools.

0 Replies

We are losing the battle...especially here in Louisiana, where religious psychotics of the Bush variety have succeeded in thoroughly intimidating the minority of sane human beings in the state into silence.

Teachers are afraid to mention evolution--too "divisive." Personally, I think the only hope lies in hoisting these Christian hobgoblins with their own crucifix. In other words, start a cult which worships Don Knotts. Or the Bee Gees. Insist on equal representation, as the freedom of religion mantra demands. "We want burnt offerings for Santa Claus at every PTA meeting!! What??! Are you threatening our religious freedom? Are you trying to persecute us??!" That's the ticket. Turn the whole thing into a total circus until the rightwing maniacs say uncle.

0 Replies

The April 2005 issue of the National Geographic has an interesting article on the primitive bones found in the caves of Indonesia. They didn't just find one, but a whole population of tiny beings. They first thought it was the bone of a child, but further investigation revealed that all of them were tiny. It is believed they lived 18,000 years ago, at a time when 'modern humans' were transiting the globe. "Survival of the fittest" seems to be confirmed over and over by new finds. When will the creationist crowd admit that evolution is fact and not just a theory?

0 Replies

c.i.,

Evolution is even more than a theory. It is an applied science. Epidemiologists regularly study the evolution of viruses (as I think rosborne pointed out.)

0 Replies

wand, But you wouldn't think so from the arguments from the creationists. Wink

0 Replies

deathtothetroops wrote:

We are losing the battle...especially here in Louisiana, where religious psychotics of the Bush variety have succeeded in thoroughly intimidating the minority of sane human beings in the state into silence.

Teachers are afraid to mention evolution--too "divisive." Personally, I think the only hope lies in hoisting these Christian hobgoblins with their own crucifix. In other words, start a cult which worships Don Knotts. Or the Bee Gees. Insist on equal representation, as the freedom of religion mantra demands. "We want burnt offerings for Santa Claus at every PTA meeting!! What??! Are you threatening our religious freedom? Are you trying to persecute us??!" That's the ticket. Turn the whole thing into a total circus until the rightwing maniacs say uncle.

Hmmm, what a fun idea Smile

0 Replies

Hey, what happened to all the witches? We burnt them ALL?? Bugger.....

0 Replies

Hey, new to this thread, so apologies if this has already been said, but:

If creationists want their views to be 'taught' in schools alongside evolution, surely this won't be a problem, if schools 'teach' by presenting possibilities and encouraging students to critically study the evidence supporting them.

In English schools, evolution is taught as 'fact', but this doesn't stop many students from being creationists, if they have been brought up that way. The fact that their point of view isn't considered tends to strengthen their beliefs, rather than challenging them. Opening the debate, and encouraging the use of evidence, seems likely to have a greater impact on a closed mind.

0 Replies

welcome to a2k djbt.

I agree that creationism should be taught in schools to enable children to appreciate how ideas develop and progress. How we have achieved what we have through the application of evidence based decisions. And how people who occupy high office and want to take us back to making decisions based on religious mumbo jumbo are being disingenuous, manipulative and are dangerous.

The abuse of children is a very serious criminal act. Driving out a child's natural curiosity about the world, heading off his innate desire to find out more and to think critically about his situation by filling his head with myth, supersition, lies and errors in the guise of "religion" is a crime.

The presentation of conjecture as fact might be called salesmanship. Do the same to children and you should go to prison for a long time.

0 Replies

Steve (as 41oo) wrote:

welcome to a2k djbt.

I agree that creationism should be taught in schools to enable children to appreciate how ideas develop and progress. How we have achieved what we have through the application of evidence based decisions. And how people who occupy high office and want to take us back to making decisions based on religious mumbo jumbo are being disingenuous, manipulative and are dangerous.

The abuse of children is a very serious criminal act. Driving out a child's natural curiosity about the world, heading off his innate desire to find out more and to think critically about his situation by filling his head with myth, supersition, lies and errors in the guise of "religion" is a crime.

The presentation of conjecture as fact might be called salesmanship. Do the same to children and you should go to prison for a long time.

I agree, neither should be taught as a fact and shoved down the throats of these children, I belive that both should be taught with the thought in mind that neither can be proven without a doubt. I believe that both should be taught later in high school, when the student is able to put everything together in their own minds and come to their own conclusion.

0 Replies

Steve (as 41oo) wrote:

I agree that creationism should be taught in schools to enable children to appreciate how ideas develop and progress. How we have achieved what we have through the application of evidence based decisions. And how people who occupy high office and want to take us back to making decisions based on religious mumbo jumbo are being disingenuous, manipulative and are dangerous.

There is a difference between what is *scientific* fact, and what is *knowable* fact.

And there is a big difference between what should be taught in a *science* class and what should be taught in *school* in general.

Evolution is a *scientific* fact, even though it's not an *absolute* fact. Science and philosophy have different boudaries.

Science class should contain only accepted science, because we have little enough time to get critical, functional, useful science into our kids brains.

"Teaching the controversy", or teaching creationism, as a social phenomena is acceptable, and maybe even beneficial in a social studies class, or a history class, or a theology class, but NEVER in a science class.

0 Replies

But if they are not taught in the same curriculum, they will be contradicting each other, they will both claim to be fact, yet they say different things. I don't think that you can split them without even more problems arising.

0 Replies

I must agree with thunder on this one; it'll only create more confusion for young minds if our schools taught evolution and creationism.

0 Replies

What's wrong with a bit of confusion? Isn't it better than misplaced certainty?

0 Replies

I don't think so. Wouldn't you rather have the facts, and make the choice yourself?

0 Replies

Yes. I think we are agreeing.

0 Replies

Cool

0 Replies

far too much agreeing around here : )

Ros What's your definition of a scientific fact as opposed to a knowable fact.?Not being deliberatly obtuse here, just interested

0 Replies

Steve (as 41oo) wrote:

far too much agreeing around here : )

Ros What's your definition of a scientific fact as opposed to a knowable fact.?Not being deliberatly obtuse here, just interested

No problem Steve,

Sometimes the simplest questions are the ones which need to be asked...

A scientific fact is one which is known beyond a reasonable doubt within the limits of science. It's a fact within a closed measurement system we call science.

A "fact" in a general sense automatically begs the question of "knowing", and knowing, is related to awareness and takes us into the realm of philosophy, which has very few (if any) limits.

Those who choose to view the world outside the limits of science, and to believe in deities and other supernatural entities, do not define "facts" the way science defines facts. For a person who believes in the supernatural, absolutely nothing can be know as a fact because the supernatural intrinsically exceeds our awareness (Gods work in *mysterious* ways and all that...).

0 Replies

So you're saying absolute truth is in the realm of the divine. Facts are man made efforts to get closer to the truth.

I can live with that although I dont like the artifical distinction between scientic fact and knowable fact. Fact is there aint no facts, just attempts to get there.

0 Replies

Evolution - Who wants to KNOW?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know