Darwins Black Box

Great Debates
41

**bdgr wrote:

And by teaching it in school as an absolute fact(thats the way it was taught to me in high school), I feel is violating the parents and students rights to freedom of religion just as much as teaching creationism would be.**

wrong, wrong, WRONG. Evolution has nothing to do with religion. Evolution is about how species change over time in response to a varying enviroment. It has nothing to do with Diety in whatever shape or form you want to view It. The subject of religion is never brought up.

Since evolution never talks about religion, how can it violate anyone’s freedom of religion?

42

foolsguinea:

So, your problem is really with abiogenesis, not evolution, isn’t it?

Do you realize that evolution does not equal atheism?

43

I will type this slowly for you, bdgr. “Believe in Evolution” is not a scientific issue. Evolution IS NOT a religion.

Please read that again. Evolution is NOT a religion.

There’s three times for you to understand that I, the poster known as Monty who just happens to be a believer in a particular deity, understand that Evolution IS NOT a religion.

“Creationism” on the other hand, is most assuredly a bad attempt at disguising religion as science.

Please be so kind as to explain why the particular “creationism” story supported by those folks just happens to be from the Bible and not from any other scripture.

Oops. That’s because to those folks, the only scripture IS the Bible.

Unlike so many creationists, I actually paid attention to my science teacher when he said, “The Theory of Evolution does not address deity one way or the other. It merely addresses the scientific theory of Evolution.”

44

Well, fine, if you don’t want science taught in the public schools, then just be consistent about it and campaign against the teaching of science altogether. I’ll be curious to see how far you get. But, if you are going to have science taught in the public schools, then don’t start telling scientists what science they can teach (or what you think is science and what you think is not). Clearly, the only reason that the teaching of evolution is challenged is because it offends some people’s religious beliefs. If you were going to omit topics to be taught in science classes starting with the most speculative, believe me, you would be throwing out a lot of topics first before you got down to evolution. I don’t really see how you can even talk about modern biology at all without talking about evolution. It is sort of like trying to talk about religion without making reference to the concept of “God”.

To teach evolution is not to force religious beliefs on someone; to not teach it is to force religious beliefs on someone because you are claiming to teach science but are in fact making choices, on religious grounds, about what science should be taught.

45

I’m not going to be able to address much of this before the exposure to virulent ignorance makes me physically ill, but let’s see if we can get one thought through:

See, that’s the beauty of science. Anyone can examine the evidence for themselves and look for errors. They are then free to point out those errors, and if they are valid, the rest of the scientific world will take note and work to fix those errors. The fact that evolution has stood up to every single solitary attack that has been made by thousands upon thousands of rabid enemies indicates that it is a very robust, healthy, and sound theory. Do you believe in gravity? Because the theory of evolution is much better scientifically than our theory of gravity. We understand how evolution works and it conflicts with no other area of science. OTOH, we’ve never been able to isolate the fundamental particle of gravity and the theory is in conflict with certain parts of quantum physics. NOTE: this is not a serious problem! We’re not about to chuck out gravity. The fact that evolution is so much sounder should give some indication of the odds of getting rid of that.

And now, my Final Thought: Ignorance of a topic does not constitute evidence against it.

Now, if you’ll excuse me, I feel a need to wander over to the Pit and rant and rave and swear.

46

bdgr said:

Then why are you here?

Seriously. Why are you debating a topic you admit to know little about, and to care little about? Isn’t is likely that perhaps the rest of us know a little bit more and care a little bit more than you do?

And yet, here you are, doing just that.

Science is not determined by a majority vote of the ignorant. It is determined by evidence. The evidence, contrary to what you may “think,” points squarely to evolution.

Evolution is science. It is taught in science class. It has nothing to do with religion, except that some people who can’t handle reality have decided to take issue with it. That is their problem, not ours.

What happens when the next religious group says they believe in miracle healing, and therefore Health class shouldn’t be taught? Or the one that believes in only speaking in Tongues, so English shouldn’t be taught?

So then you, as a parent, explain that you believe differently from many other people, and why.

Since there is no “church” in evolution, there is no “both ways” to go.

47

Oh, bloody hell! I have never in my life screwed up the coding like that. Now I really need to vent. Off to IRC!!

48

What I was taught in school was that evolution is the way life began on this planet, that man evolved from lower life forms etc. Since this, however likely to be true it is, is no where near a proven fact, and is taught as absolute fact, and directly contridicts a very large segment of the populations ideas and religious beliefs on how things came about, I think it does. It is, in effect, the government telling a large body of people that thier religion is wrong. It is just as wrong as school prayer being forced on non christians, in my opinion.

49

Im not a creationist, but I did pay attention to my science teacher, who said no such thing. They pretty much said, this is the way it happened. You were required to answer questions on test saying that this was the way it happened. It was not taught as a theory in the least. I hear it is in some places, I would certainly be more ok with that then it being taught as an absolute truth.

50

I guess I have more of a problem with the way it is presented as fact. And I wouldnt have a problem with it being offered as an elective. Its just when it is shoved down everyones throat as absolutely true, and the only possible way it could have happened, that kind of bothers me.

51

who ever said that Ignorace of a topic DOES constitute evedence? I never said any such thing.

I am not talking about which theory is correct. All I am saying is that people have a right to believe what they want, and to raise thier childeren in thier beliefs. There are quite a few people who do not buy into evolution. It hasnt been proven to be fact. I AM NOT SAYING THAT IT IS FALSE, only that there a lot of people who believe it is, and believe that they have evidence to support thier position. To force their children to only hear one side of the argument, is not right in my opinion.

52

You claim to be starting a debate then defend yourself by attacking the charachter of a poster?

Ad homynym attacks, the crutch of the unsupported!

[sarcasm]
teach me oh master so that I may debate as well as you
[/sarcasm]

53

I’m not debating the merits of eithr side, just the rights of both sides to belief as they wish, and raise thier children as such.

I’m not.

well, the evidence has been interpreted in more than one way. Because someone disagrees with the popular intrepretation doesn’t make them ignorant. It may make them wrong…

You know, I have heard some creationist types argue that people believe in evolution because they cant handle the concept of God, and of right and wrong…PLEASE NOTE: That is not a view I subscribe to in the least, but it is just as insulting as saying that “people who can’t handle reality have decided to take issue with it”. It is making an unfair generalization about peoples motives.

Thats the same argument that the “prayer in school types” use. That atheists should just teach their children at home about their beliefs and not worry about thier children being forced to listen to religious doctrine. It doesnt wash.

The government should not tell people any particular religion is right, and they shouldn’t tell people that any particular religion is wrong.
After all of this I would like to say that if evolution were offered only as an elective, as I suggested, I would want my child to take it any way. I just think that the people who object to it being taught to thier kids have a legitimate point, and the only reason I posted on the subject at all was because I felt that there was a side to the argument that needed to be presented. As I said, I am not a creationist. I personally dont care how we got here, I just believe in tolerance of all beliefs, or lack of beliefs, for that matter.

Sorry if I upset you so badly S.H.

54

bdgr:

I have some simple questions. Maybe you’d like to take a shot at them? Since you disagree with evolution being tought as a “fact” and all, and have some questions as to how it is tought, I’m sure that you can handle these quite easily…
[ol]
[li]Please tell me how it happened if we did not get here through abiogenesis and then evolution?[/li][li]Please tell me exactly how every bit of the mountain of data, both observable and deduced through logical reasoning, through almost every scientific discipline from astronomy to zoology, is somehow all adding up to the above scenerio?[/li][li]Please posit your own theory as to how we got here and offer up evidence. To be sporting about it, I won’t require a volume approximating the mountain of evidence that you refuse to accept. I’ll start with any old thing you have, really.[/li][li]Please show me where religion has ever been mentioned in any science text books designed for any High School or college curiculum in the United States?[/li][li]Since you seem to think that we shouldn’t teach Evolution, and think that Creationism should have equal footing, which creation myth should we teach? The Chinese Creation Myth where Pan Gu, after 18,000 years in a black egg, broke out, grew for 18,000 more years, and when he died was the universe? Maybe one of the Egyptian Creation Myth, where the heavenly cow named Nut gives birth to the sun daily before swallowing it to start every night? Maybe the Samoan Creation Myth, where the god Tagaloa told a rock to become the planet and his children? How about an Australian Aboriginal Legend, with Baiame fashioning man and women out of dust and dunes? Maybe the Mexican Creation Myth, which has Quetzalcoatl creating man from the pulverized bones of his father and his own blood? Maybe the Aztec Creation Myth, which involved our pal Quetzacoatl turning everyone into fishes except for two people who were spared? Or we can draw from the slew of Native American Creation Myths, which include the Chippewa belief that a woman and a magical dog got together in a cave and nine months later the human race was here, and (my personal favorite), the Chukchee belief that the self-created Raven flew high, relieved himself as he flew and his shit became the land and his piss the waters of the planet, if you like. So which one is it?[/li][/ol]
A few simple questions that you have to be able to answer if you even want to begin to change the way science is not only taught, but understood and practiced.

In fact, answer these simple questions correctly, and you not only change the way science is taught in your local High Scool, you also probably get a Nobel Peace Prize.

I anxiously await your replies…

Yer pal,
Satan

*TIME ELAPSED SINCE I QUIT SMOKING:
Ten months, one day, 8 hours, 36 minutes and 36 seconds.
12294 cigarettes not smoked, saving $1,537.00.
Extra life saved: 6 weeks, 16 hours, 30 minutes.

See my Sig File FAQ: http://pages.prodigy.net/briank.o/SigFAQ.htm*

55

Adding to Satan’s message:

Annexe B:
Given that the Xtian objection to Evolution you’ve put forth is actually that of a sub-set of Xtians and not all:

Please explain:
(1) Why this is limited to biological sciences and why any school teaching, historical or otherwise(*), not in keeping with this group’s belief system should not be banned from schools

(2) What about other groups desires not to have the same right. Large numbers of Americans appear to believe in para-normal powers and space aliens. Should not Physics classes be excluded for demonstrating the fallacious nature of these beliefs?

(*: e.g. Historical descriptions of the Catholic church which do not presume that the Pope is a minion of Satan – for illustrative purposes only; History of the Middle East which does not operate from the assumption the Bible is literally true, etc.)

56

First off, the definition of Theory in Science is different than that of Theory in Mathematics. Basically, in Math a theory is a guess and a theorem is a proven guess. I’ve already quoted the actual definition of theory for scientists. This obviously leaves out creationists and you because you, and they, stubbornly refuse to accept that definition. Continuing to assert that a scientific theory is a guess after repeatedly being shown that is not the case is no more nor less than being dishonest.

Second, your teacher, if competent, would have said, “The preponderance of evidence supports the theory of evolution.” Note that there’s no such thing as the Theorem of Evolution because, for scientists, the word used is theory.

Third, it has been pointed out already that anyone can critique a scientific theory provided new evidence comes to light.

Fourth, no evidence has come to light yet to support a scientific theory other than evolution.

Fifth, it has also been pointed out that the Bible is not a science textbook no matter how much the creationists wish it to be.

57

bdgr:

Creationism is not a theory. It’s a religious belief, and thus does not belong in science class.

Of course they do. But they should teach their kids religion outside of public school.

There are also quite a few people who do not buy into the germ theory of disease. I know people who believe disease to be the result of evil spirits and demons. This does not mean we should teach exorcism in science class.

Then, right off the bat, you know those “creationist types” are talking out of their asses, because anyone who is not virulently ignorant knows that not all evolutionists are atheists. In fact, most Christians don’t have a problem with evolution.

Except that compelling kids to pray in school is clearly religious. Science is not religion.

58

bdgr said:

They don’t. They teach science. Part of science is evolution. As I have already explained, scientists and teachers cannot be responsible for the many and varying beliefs across the spectrum. I notice that you didn’t respond to the part of my message in which I gave other possible examples of things that other religious people might find offensive.

Good. But evolution is not an elective – it forms the basis of biology. Should we make atomic theory an elective? How about gravitational theory?

59

[Moderator Hat: ON]

bdgr, please stop requoting entire (or almost entire) messages. Only quote that which is necessary to your reply.

Thanks.

David B, SDMB Great Debates Moderator

[Moderator Hat: OFF]

60

Sorry about that. Didnt realize I was doing that…It was late…