Evolution? How?

Somehow, I dont think that your point resonates with that crowd set. They are the one attempting to intrude in science curriculum , and we are the ones being unreasonable.

Whats the words to the tune that Cornwallis had his band play at Yorktown?

0 Replies

So you would be happy if it were taught under a different title? That is the real bottom line? It's just being taught under the wrong name?

0 Replies

I attended a private high school for 2 years, and a private university for my undergraduate degree. In both they had courses in theology. Within those courses it was christians teaching christians how to rationalize their beliefs in creationism within a world that believed in evolution.

This is how it should be taught. Creationism is a portion of the christian belief system. As has been stated numerous times, it can never be proven by science, therefore it should not be taught as a science. Things that may be proven by science have reason to be taught as science. Things that can't be, shouldn't be.

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

. . . There is every opportunity to present religion in comparative religion classes, which can be elective. . .

I agree totally. The last thing I would like to have my children (or grandchildren) endure is a course taught by someone who believes the earth was created in 7 literal days. (See below)

Setanta wrote:

Flying Spaghetti Monsterism has me worried, though, Boss . . . it's making gains among the credulous and those with a strong sense of absurdity by leaps and bounds . . . the afterlife, with hookers and beers, is just too seductive . . .

Hey! when I invited you to the barbecue, you said you didn't drink beer.

wandeljw wrote:

There are also those who believe other scientific theories in public schools should be countered with alternatives. (Such as the insistence that "intelligent falling" be taught alongside gravity.)

How else would the parachute be invented?

cicerone imposter wrote:

Muslims are promised 71 virgins. I wonder what christians are promised? LOL

If they get the 71 virgins, then there must be a hell. Laughing

farmerman wrote:

(even the silly "half assertion" that neologist made (but really didnt make according to him) about bay blood clotting).

I most certainly did make an assertion. You just didn't get it.

farmerman wrote:

AS for neo, jews state that the Creation week was 7 days. It included the big guys R&R day. The tradition of a briss is determined from the creation week. Im sure youre full of all kinds of coincidences , but as we say herein, SO WHAT?

My feelings are hurt. OW! I've been reviling religious leaders for several months and have often detailed their digressions from the printed word, and you haven't noticed.

http://web4.ehost-services.com/el2ton1/crybaby.gif

Jesus rebuked the pharisees for their traditions. Do you think it might have been because they were wrong?

farmerman wrote:

Set and CI its good having you both back also, not that ros and I were working up any lather. :wink:

Nor did the hare.

0 Replies

truthfully neo, when the topic goes off on a verse for verse whupass fest, I zone out. So, I guess I missed all your references to rebukin.

As far as your vitamin K story, Im confused then. What was the point you tried to make? if not an oblique assertion that somehow 8 days post birth and briss was a biological inference by the all knowing patriarchs? Isnt that the point you were trying to leave on the table?

0 Replies

farmerman wrote:

truthfully neo, when the topic goes off on a verse for verse whupass fest, I zone out. So, I guess I missed all your references to rebukin.

As far as your vitamin K story, Im confused then. What was the point you tried to make? if not an oblique assertion that somehow 8 days post birth and briss was a biological inference by the all knowing patriarchs? Isnt that the point you were trying to leave on the table?

The patriarchs could not have had the remotest idea about blood clotting. They may have assumed the 8th day was a reference to what they thought about creation. But the point is they obeyed without asking for an explanation. Gollywhoopers, they never even asked why circumcision.

If Rabbi O'Reilly had decided it would be better on the 3rd day, most Israelite children would probably have survived, don't you think? they never could have figured it out by themselves.

That's my point and I'm stickin' to it.

0 Replies

Momma Angel wrote:

So you would be happy if it were taught under a different title? That is the real bottom line? It's just being taught under the wrong name?

This is the sort of idiocy which beggars the argument of the imaginary friend crowd. Such a statement attempts to suggest that science is simply an arbitrary name for a branch of learning, and that any other name would do just as well. That's horsie poop. Science describes a method whereby every effort which is consistent with a logical procedure which others can follow to the same ends will reveal useful information about our world. It is the very antithesis of believing any old crap on the basis of blind faith.

No, the bottom line is that creationism and "intelligent design" are not science, they are not amenable to a critical examination of method and sources of data, and therefore have no place in a science curriculum.

0 Replies

Day and night was the first day; day and nite was the second day; day and night was the third day; etc., etc., etc. Looks like 24 hour days to me! But then I'm not sure how else to interpret "day and night."

0 Replies

Momma Angel wrote:

So you would be happy if it were taught under a different title? That is the real bottom line? It's just being taught under the wrong name?

Yes.

Science class is for science. Math class if for math. Music class if for music. And Poofism class is for Intelligent Design.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

Day and night was the first day; day and nite was the second day; day and night was the third day; etc., etc., etc. Looks like 24 hour days to me! But then I'm not sure how else to interpret "day and night."

Evening and morning, to be more specific. If that doesn't confuse you, how about Genesis 2:4, which rolls the entire process into one day? Frustrating, eh?

BUT! That's not all.

Yes indeed, friends the 7th day is not yet over. How could that be?

Gollywhoopers, CI, do you think maybe we are talking figuratively here?

But you've been told that, right? You were just checking to see if I still believed that, right?

http://web4.ehost-services.com/el2ton1/rofl.gif

0 Replies

Like the whole bible is "figuratively" expressed just like all the comic books that exist in the world today. ha ha ha ha ha....

So all them theological experts that studied the bible got it all wrong.

Only neo has all the correct interpretation of the comic book they call their bible.

0 Replies

I am still totally amazed that someone who does not believe the bible; someone who mocks the bible and those who believe it; someone who laughs like a hyena over his own words; someone to insists that scholars got it all wrong; someone who has trouble forumating a complete sentence; someone who insists on calling those who do believe "they"; someone who claims that Christians are pushing their religion on him; someone who is wrong about "us" pushing it on him would try to push his hatred filled comments onto "us". I fail to see the point. I can understand discussion. I do not understand rantingings and wailings with no substance.

0 Replies

Intrepid,
I am glad you are here. As you know, the path is narrow and there are few who will ever enter the gate. Ignorance is bliss.
Hey Guru, isn't ther another post where you can offer positive thoughts to those who share your views?

0 Replies

This topic has seemingly morphed from "Evolution How?" to," May I come into your living room and spew some mythology about floods, and Creation, and how a magical spirit makes you do things that three millenia later you will research and find answers".
Face it, youre playing in arena that you are ill equipped to play in so you want to drag others down into your pit of ignorance. The fact that most of us can see that theres nobody behind the curtain just galls you.
NOw were gonna be blasted with yet even more of"The gate is narrow and few will make it" That bit od admonition is the Creationist version of "Divine Selection" or
"Arrival of the most pious"
Welcome on board non-denom Christian. I just feel that your going to need more than clips from homilies to make a point with this crowd.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

Like the whole bible is "figuratively" expressed just like all the comic books that exist in the world today. ha ha ha ha ha....

So all them theological experts that studied the bible got it all wrong.

Only neo has all the correct interpretation of the comic book they call their bible.

Another original thought. How impressive. My interpretation may or not be correct, but at least it is based on what the bible says.

BTW, Frank has been visiting another board. Toadies may find him simply by Googling his name. He's in over his head and could use some support. Not that he didn't need all he could get here. Laughing

0 Replies

My, my, my Neo--how harsh your tone. You sound bitter. Is the strain getting to you?

If Frank has toadies, which i doubt, i rather suspect they found him before you did.

Lighten up, boy . . . here, have some bar-b-qued wings and a nice soft drink . . .

0 Replies

I think frank is banned actually, that's what his little status symbol said anyways.

0 Replies

Frank mustave been posting the PASTAFARIANS website again. I hope his term is up soon, there seems to be an abundance of Anti-Franks around.

0 Replies

thunder_runner32 wrote:

I think frank is banned actually, that's what his little status symbol said anyways.

Yup, that sounds like our Frank, always flirting with being banned Smile

0 Replies

Former President Jimmy Carter made an interesting comment earlier this week about science and religion:

Quote:

I think we ought to discover everything we can about science. It ought to be accepted as proved unless it's discounted. I believe still in a supreme being. But, I don't believe that we ought to teach religious matters in a science classroom, because I think that the two ought not to be related.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know