Johnny Coli Posted August 10, 2005 Posted August 10, 2005 In all seriousness, I can't believe this is even a subject of debate in the year 2005. Have our educational standards fallen so low that we would allow children to be taught that the key to that scientific "black box" that we haven't been able to open is "God did it"? That is not education, that is indoctrination. Intelligent Design is not science. Intelligent Design is Creationism camouflaged by a seemingly innocuous term to lend it credibility. If the whole thing wasn’t so dangerous it would be laughable. Time to start looking for that theory of De-Evolution, because it looks like the species has plateued and may actually be spiralling back toward the ooze. To equate some people with monkeys is an insult to monkeys.
Chilly Posted August 10, 2005 Posted August 10, 2005 In all seriousness, I can't believe this is even a subject of debate in the year 2005. Have our educational standards fallen so low that we would allow children to be taught that the key to that scientific "black box" that we haven't been able to open is "God did it"? That is not education, that is indoctrination. Intelligent Design is not science. Intelligent Design is Creationism camouflaged by a seemingly innocuous term to lend it credibility. If the whole thing wasn’t so dangerous it would be laughable. Time to start looking for that theory of De-Evolution, because it looks like the species has plateued and may actually be spiralling back toward the ooze. To equate some people with monkeys is an insult to monkeys. 403970[/snapback] lol, I do agree.
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted August 10, 2005 Posted August 10, 2005 In all seriousness, I can't believe this is even a subject of debate in the year 2005. Have our educational standards fallen so low that we would allow children to be taught that the key to that scientific "black box" that we haven't been able to open is "God did it"? That is not education, that is indoctrination. 403970[/snapback] I'd respond...but judging by the thunder outside God must be mad at me, so I have to go hide under the bed.
John Adams Posted August 10, 2005 Posted August 10, 2005 Many of the Homobillinnyceous tree [humans] overlapped for thousands of years. See Wiki chart on overlaps of homo species 403770[/snapback] I'm not sure how many in the homobillinnyceous tree overlapped geographically though. Life isn't one big Jane Auel novel, you know.
Reuben Gant Posted August 10, 2005 Posted August 10, 2005 I'd respond...but judging by the thunder outside God must be mad at me, so I have to go hide under the bed. 403977[/snapback] That isn't God. That is Underdog protecting you. You're safe right? Therefore it must be Underdog: speed of lightning, roar of thunder fighting all who rob or plunder Underdog.
Wacka Posted August 10, 2005 Posted August 10, 2005 Evidence for the overlap of species: Sen. Byrd (D-KKK) is still alive!
Typical TBD Guy Posted August 10, 2005 Posted August 10, 2005 EVOLUTION is to be taught only in a SCIENCE class. ID is to be taught only in a PHILOSOPHY class. That is, until the ID believers can: 1. Develop large bodies of scholarly scientific work that provide evidence for ID AND 2. Develop large bodies of scholarly scientific work that provide evidence against evolution AND 3. Have these bodies of scholarly scientific work endure a rigorous examination by the scientific community thereafter. But this is all JMHO, though. And I have to add that I find the arrogance of some people in this thread like CTM and Jonny Coli a little bit annoying. While it's fun sometimes to make fun of people with lesser intellects - just like it's fun sometimes to make fun of retards and the handicapped and ugly people - keep in mind that you can always find people of greater intellects than yourself. Those accomplished enough in their careers and/or fields of science should not have this much time to lecture the masses of commoners that frequent TBD. In some posts in this thread (and others), I've detected hints of strong atheistic beliefs. Whether or not they've been made with tongue in cheek, keep in mind that atheists cannot stand on any intellectual higher ground than the religious ID'ers since they're only applying the same unscientific thought process to come to their beliefs. Until God can be scientifically proven to NOT exist (impossible, IMO), atheists have no greater authority on any debate outside that of philosophy.
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted August 10, 2005 Posted August 10, 2005 EVOLUTION is to be taught only in a SCIENCE class. ID is to be taught only in a PHILOSOPHY class. That is, until the ID believers can: 1. Develop large bodies of scholarly scientific work that provide evidence for ID AND 2. Develop large bodies of scholarly scientific work that provide evidence against evolution AND 3. Have these bodies of scholarly scientific work endure a rigorous examination by the scientific community thereafter. But this is all JMHO, though. And I have to add that I find the arrogance of some people in this thread like CTM and Jonny Coli a little bit annoying. While it's fun sometimes to make fun of people with lesser intellects - just like it's fun sometimes to make fun of retards and the handicapped and ugly people - keep in mind that you can always find people of greater intellects than yourself. Those accomplished enough in their careers and/or fields of science should not have this much time to lecture the masses of commoners that frequent TBD. In some posts in this thread (and others), I've detected hints of strong atheistic beliefs. Whether or not they've been made with tongue in cheek, keep in mind that atheists cannot stand on any intellectual higher ground than the religious ID'ers since they're only applying the same unscientific thought process to come to their beliefs. Until God can be scientifically proven to NOT exist (impossible, IMO), atheists have no greater authority on any debate outside that of philosophy. 404098[/snapback] Only a little bit? I must be slipping.
stuckincincy Posted August 10, 2005 Posted August 10, 2005 Until God can be scientifically proven to NOT exist (impossible, IMO), atheists have no greater authority on any debate outside that of philosophy. 404098[/snapback] With very few exceptions, historically and today, atheists toss away their venom when they age and face their own mortality and proceed to embrace God, often citing that that they will be forgiven at last, rejecting in their life-long utterances against any concept of judgement - an inconvenient concept, they felt, that tried to make them feel bad about their hurts upon others. There was some big science or philosophy mucky-muck just a few months ago that did just that -a late repentance. When they lie in their death bed, they universally squeal words like "you are the believer! You have to forgive me!", and hope to make others guilty. No sale. Their last egotism. They are in for a surprise.
jimshiz Posted August 10, 2005 Posted August 10, 2005 In all seriousness, I can't believe this is even a subject of debate in the year 2005. Have our educational standards fallen so low that we would allow children to be taught that the key to that scientific "black box" that we haven't been able to open is "God did it"? That is not education, that is indoctrination. 403970[/snapback] I must be retarded then because that is exactly what I am teaching my kids.
John Adams Posted August 10, 2005 Posted August 10, 2005 I must be retarded then because that is exactly what I am teaching my kids. 404131[/snapback] Good. My kids will kick the crap out of your kids in science. While your kids can't rewire a circuit (god's mysteries), mine will. And when my kid fixes her bike, yours can let god fix it. And on and on. God is important, but god is not science. If you want to teach god, you should. And then, when you're in science class, teach science. And when you're in math class, teach math. And in spelling, teach spelling (god made the sounds). Wonder why American kids suck in science. Well, wonder no more.
Typical TBD Guy Posted August 10, 2005 Posted August 10, 2005 Only a little bit? I must be slipping. 404103[/snapback] Well I said "a little bit" because sometimes extreme idiots like BF need to be put in their place. And whenever you attack stevestojan on subjects like politics, well those can often become instant classics!
RuntheDamnBall Posted August 10, 2005 Author Posted August 10, 2005 I must be retarded then because that is exactly what I am teaching my kids. 404131[/snapback] No one's calling you retarded. If I might clarify Coli's point, again, we're talking about what we teach kids in school. You are free to teach your kids what you want at home in terms of religion, but that doesn't have to mean that we junk science/the scientific method/the curiosity of discovery in the lab or the classroom.
Reuben Gant Posted August 10, 2005 Posted August 10, 2005 I must be retarded then because that is exactly what I am teaching my kids. 404131[/snapback] You are not teaching your kids evolutionary theory? I think that if you don't know at least what evolutionary theory is, that you are not educated.
Gavin in Va Beach Posted August 10, 2005 Posted August 10, 2005 And when my kid fixes her bike, yours can let god fix it. Wonder why American kids suck in science. Well, wonder no more. 404150[/snapback] Oops, I guess your kid is a girl then. The president of Harvard says she'll suck at science...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted August 10, 2005 Posted August 10, 2005 No one's calling you retarded. 404158[/snapback] I am.
John Adams Posted August 10, 2005 Posted August 10, 2005 Oops, I guess your kid is a girl then. The president of Harvard says she'll suck at science... 404162[/snapback] Nah. She's going to private schools, where I pay to have her educated about god, in all the flavors (oh, the humanity), and where they aren't jimtarded enough to even consider teaching ID in science.
OGTEleven Posted August 10, 2005 Posted August 10, 2005 All of this back and forth about science vs religion does not change two basic thinngs: 1. Idiots like the spaghetti monster author think they are so smart that they can mock the belief in a creator. They are only using the classes and IDers as a proxy. It comes through loud and clear. They're free to do so. I just wonder how they're so smart that they can figure out God is a myth, but they aren't smart enough to do simple things like explain free will, eradicate cancer or hop around the universe on their tricycles. 2. While ID as "science" is misguided, it is being proposed as a defense mechanism. Deny it all you want, but the teaching of evolution in schools has led many to believe there is no God. Although in theory, evolution should be "God neutral", in practice it has not been. I believe in God. I want my kids to believe in God (Although they will not be forced, I will explain my beliefs.) I see no reason why I should allow a faulty system of education have them come to a different conclusion based on facts that don't connect.
RuntheDamnBall Posted August 10, 2005 Author Posted August 10, 2005 All of this back and forth about science vs religion does not change two basic thinngs: 1. Idiots like the spaghetti monster author think they are so smart that they can mock the belief in a creator. They are only using the classes and IDers as a proxy. It comes through loud and clear. They're free to do so. I just wonder how they're so smart that they can figure out God is a myth, but they aren't smart enough to do simple things like explain free will, eradicate cancer or hop around the universe on their tricycles. 2. While ID as "science" is misguided, it is being proposed as a defense mechanism. Deny it all you want, but the teaching of evolution in schools has led many to believe there is no God. Although in theory, evolution should be "God neutral", in practice it has not been. I believe in God. I want my kids to believe in God (Although they will not be forced, I will explain my beliefs.) I see no reason why I should allow a faulty system of education have them come to a different conclusion based on facts that don't connect. 404230[/snapback] For you, the FSM author is an idiot. For me, he's a clever guy pointing out that scientifically, his "beliefs" are as credible to teach in a science classroom setting as ID. I come from a religious background and was not offended. I understand it's a touchy subject for some, but I also think God gave us a good sense of humor. Those drawings are priceless. Your second point doesn't really defend the teaching of ID. It defends God-neutral teaching, which I think is fine and should probably be fought for. Pro- or anti- religious teachings in the classroom are problematic and should be strictly avoided. If you've raised your kids right, they will make their own decisions based on what you've taught them and what they've learned about the world. Forcing anything else is detrimental, IMHO.
Recommended Posts