Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Curriculum approved by experts in each subject is not indoctrination, Foxfyre.

0 Replies

It's no wonder Fox chose her pseudonym; she claims she's for teaching science, but wants teachers the right to also teach ID in science class.

As the saying goes; dumb like a fox.

0 Replies

That was not lost on me either Ci. "Havin it both ways" is always a good fallback position .

I firmly believe that a suit would be brought by some pissed off parents, but it would be stayed should the bills be enacted and enforced just once. Having it on the books actually does not overstep any boundary, only when its employed does it invite a suit(One would have to have some idea exactly which "alternative scientific theory " would be brought forward). I also believe that the suit would eventually die in some kind of summary judgement because of all the facts that are already in complete agreement (and I suppose the potential costs will help). I cant see another FEderal judge wanting to walk in Jones shadow, or some school district portraying itself as a bunch of fools if they know going in that their chances to even break even would be slim to none.

0 Replies

Okay, Spendi, get ready to chastise me for being boring again. . .

I have NOT suggested nor advocated nor would I condone teaching ID in science class.

Repeat, I have NOT suggested nor advocated nor would I condone teaching ID in science class.

One more time, I have NOT suggested nor advocated nor would I condone teaching ID in science class.

Sorry Spendi, but the AIDers seem to have such a severe reading comprehension problem, it is simply necessary to keep the record straight for those who don't read back more than a few posts.

0 Replies

wandeljw wrote:

Curriculum approved by experts in each subject is not indoctrination, Foxfyre.

Not allowing a teacher any freedom to even mention any other concept other than the prescribed curriculum can indeed be indoctrination in every aspect, Wandel.

0 Replies

wandeljw wrote:

Curriculum approved by experts in each subject is not indoctrination, Foxfyre.

Not allowing a teacher any freedom to even mention any other concept other than the prescribed curriculum can indeed be indoctrination in every aspect, Wandel.

0 Replies

wandeljw wrote:

Curriculum approved by experts in each subject is not indoctrination, Foxfyre.

Not allowing a teacher any freedom to even mention any other concept other than the prescribed curriculum can indeed be indoctrination in every aspect, Wandel. And what is indoctrination but pushing one

0 Replies

wande wrote-

Quote:

The Florida ACLU is being alert about this. Their director remarked: "There is no constitutional right to mis-educate children."

wande--do you not recall that I showed the statement to be meaningless? It was only yesterday.

What does it mean? If you are going to bring it to our attention twice you should know what it means. So tell us and then we might be able to discuss it.

0 Replies

I wonder , based upon criteria established within the scientific method, what an alternative theory would be? NEither IDjicy nor Creationism constitute real "theories", they are merely "magical mythical tours"

foxfyreOh yeah, indoctrination is okay and allowing children to expand their thinking and to see other possibilities is interpreted as confusing them.

Quote:

. Im quite confused about your stand foxy. You only wish that evo/devo be taught in science , yet you want it open to present ID as an "alternative theory".

Either you are confused as to what constitutes a theory, or else, you say "theory shmeory" I want ID to be presented somewhere.
If its a scientific theory then the schools are required not to teach anything that is not evidence based. Otherwise they will be violating their very own recently passed (and argued over) definition of what evoloution is.
Sre you hinting that ID be given a "free ride" and not be tested in the same fashion as natural selection , before being taught itself as a "scientific theory"?

Some minds want to know.

0 Replies

Setanta wrote-

Quote:

The irony here is killin' me . . . there is no more blatant a form of indoctrination that religious orthodoxy, which is, preferably, shoved down the throat of the child before she is even old enough to understand the words being used. There never was a vendor of the superstitious claptrap of religion who ever intended for his victims to expand their thinking.

How do you explain that all the scientific thinking of western culture has come from people educated in the Christian religion.

One can just as easily say that potty training and table manners are "shoved down the throat of the child" before it is old enough to understand.

Veblen said that the teenage illegitimacy rate measured the triumph of the hormones over the proprieties. Which is obviously true. Are there to be no proprieties under your wise aegis?

BTW- Why do you ignore this thread for long periods and then come jumping in with another infantile contribution every blue moon? Your thinking is not very expansive. You were doing "superstitious claptrap" three years ago. It was a self-serving assertion then just as it is now and that is not very expansive thinking. It's just meaningless, repetitive noise.

If what you AIDs-ers think is "expanding" thinking is to ignore any signs of it and just carry on banging the one-note drum it is no wonder there are people opposing you.

0 Replies

wande wrote-

Quote:

Curriculum approved by experts in each subject is not indoctrination, Foxfyre.

Try not to be so ridiculous wande.

0 Replies

Foxy wrote-

Quote:

Sorry Spendi, but the AIDers seem to have such a severe reading comprehension problem, it is simply necessary to keep the record straight for those who don't read back more than a few posts.

They don't "read" at all Foxy. Not in any generally accepted use of the term. In my view these AIDs-ers are illiterate. And bad mannered. They have but one interest--sounding off on their penny whistles.

They haven't the faintest idea of the nature of the social organism nor the dynamics in play within it. And they don't want to know either. It would scare the **** out of them.

0 Replies

Quote:

How do you explain that all the scientific thinking of western culture has come from people educated in the Christian religion.

Now hes sounding like RL.
Spendi, you make the false connection that its "because" they were trained in Christian theology that somehow these scientific thoughts were derivative. Thats garbage because Im sure you know that EUrope was more of a johny-come lately "Great sponge" of scientific thought originated and developed elsewhere. They owed so much to Arab , Indian, and Chinese science and engineering . Not to mention the debts owed to the Non-Christain Greeks and pre christian Romans.

In fact, while the great developments of the CAlculus and physics were being provided by others, European Christians were living in swill and superstition.

Taking credit for the scientific sunrise has always been a Christian thing.

0 Replies

See how they hid their eyes at a mere glimpse of the psychosomatic problem, the gospel of Luke, Footballer's Wives and dozens of other matters I have brought up.

They think talking about expanded thinking is the same as expanded thinking. They use such things as status symbols as with unread coffee table books.

It's a terrible problem. It means nothing other than contactless sociability.

Just meditate on that "mis-educate" for a while. I can't see how they can conduct a conversation at all.

And it seems to be endemic in the chattering class.

If you seek a sign of the end-times there is no better one. It all hinges on who has their hands on the one way megaphone.

0 Replies

fm wrote-

Quote:

NEither IDjicy nor Creationism constitute real "theories", they are merely "magical mythical tours"

Well at least fm seems finally able to separate the two. That's progress.

I accept progress will be slow with all these closed off minds.

But what magic fm. Cleaning seafood out of the bowthrusters is a long way from breaking coconuts on a rock. And "very nice" restaurants are a long way from nothing but bread.

Have you a clear grasp how the social organism works because if you haven't you could look like a bull in a china shop.

0 Replies

Quote:

But what magic fm. Cleaning seafood out of the bowthrusters is a long way from breaking coconuts on a rock. And "very nice" restaurants are a long way from nothing but bread.

Have you a clear grasp how the social organism works because if you haven't you could look like a bull in a china shop.

What a sad life you must live to spendi all your hours in vicarious existence.
Is that the best you can do?

0 Replies

fm wrote-

Quote:

Sre you hinting that ID be given a "free ride" and not be tested in the same fashion as natural selection , before being taught itself as a "scientific theory"?

Some minds want to know.

No they don't. Another false self-serving assertion.

How many times has it been explained to you that ID is not taught.

Something is explained to you over and over. You proceed as if it hadn't been explained. You don't take issue with the explanation, you simply ignore it and revert to your arid mantras.

You really do have a desperate need to play on a pitch of your own design. Expanding thinking or critical thinking are a closed book to you fm. Your mind snapped shut years ago and the bolts have rusted.

0 Replies

Quote:

How many times has it been explained to you that ID is not taught

=A

Quote:

Something is explained to you over and over. You proceed as if it hadn't been explained.

=B

No, I merely ignore you because youre a loon.

0 Replies

fm wrote-

Quote:

What a sad life you must live to spendi all your hours in vicarious existence.
Is that the best you can do?

Here we go again. More meaningless drivel. Very ladylike I must say. Roxxxanne said the same about me yesterday.

It's trying to have the last word in the absence of having any to offer.

No IDer, a real one I mean, would go about declaring the lives of others to be "sad". They all know that it isn't scraping the bottom of the barrel so much as the actual bottom itself being sucked on.

There are billions of lives out there a very great deal sadder than mine and pre-Christian society held out no hope of anything else for everybody and for ever and ever.

You must not understand the significance of the mathematics of dynamic space is the only explanation I can think of and you refuse to allow that anybody else does.

Why don't you give Spengler a go instead of just assuming it is of no use. Everybody who finds Spengler too difficult always ends up just asserting it is of no use. All snapped-shut minds do that.

Is The Decline of the West not in the library of the educational establishment you work in? Is The Theory of the Leisure Class on your shelves? Any Freud? Any Materialist Theory of Mind? Pavlov? Gibbon? Rabelais. Original Shakespeare? (inc. the 600 odd nose jokes).

To name but a few. I would bet that your library is clear proof of snapped-shut and bolted minds. Wall to wall.

None of you AIDs-ers are in this argument at all. If it boosts your egos to think you are I'm unconvinced that our viewers agree with you.

As rl once said--you shoot yourselves in the foot everytime you put fingers to the keyboard. Everytime. Without exception, if I may indulge a tautology.

0 Replies

fm wrote-

Quote:

No, I merely ignore you because youre a loon.

Have you any scientific evidence to back that stupidity up fm?

0 Replies

Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know