Dont have one. Never claimed to. never refused to accept anything evidence wise.
Dont know of any. Never claimed that there was.
I do think evolution should be taught, but not required. I said before that if it were offered as an elective, I would want my child to take it. I never said that creationism should have equal footing, but now that you mention it, maybe it should be offered, as an elective, with all the versions you mentioned being covered. I never really thought of that, but thats sounds like it might be interesting.
As far as I know, evolution has not been proven to be true. It may be true. There is a lot of evidence to support it being true. But there are those who disagree, it is not universally accepted to be fact.
I not be the least suprised that my teachers were incompetent.
And there are still those who say the world is flat. So what?
In science, nothing is ever “proven” to the degree you seem to want. However, evolution is accepted because of all the evidence behind it. Are there those who disagree? Yes. Do they do so because of the scientific evidence or because of their religious beliefs? The latter. Thus, we should be teaching the best science in our classrooms. Evolution is the best science. It belongs in the school.
I’m still waiting for your answer to the points I raised earlier.
Yes, bdgr, that is much better. I’m not sure how you could misunderstand when I asked you not to quote the entire message and then you respond by quoting the entire message, but as long as you don’t do it anymore, I’m happy.
I guess I assumed you meant the paragraphs unrelated to what I was replying two, like in a longer message. Since your message was short, and enirely about my screw up, I assumed that it would be ok just to reply to the message, without editing it. I now see the error of that assumption.
That’s called a comparative religion class, and yes, it’s fascinating. I’d be in favor of every school offering such a course. That’s where creationism belongs.
The problem with people who want “equal time” is that they present creationism as being just as valid, scientifically, as evolution. (I’m not saying that creationism isn’t “valid”: it’s a religious belief that is valid within a religious framework, and science can neither prove nor disprove it. However, it is not scientifically valid.)
Then, too, Christian creationists can’t agree which variety of creationism is correct: you have your young earth creationists, your old earth creationists, your creationists who believe that animals evolved but humans were a special creation of God, and so on. Each faction comes to its conclusion based on its particular interpretation of Genesis, not by rational evaluation of evidence.
As David said, science cannot offer absolute “proof” that evolution is correct. Science does not work that way. Maybe the world is really flat (science can’t disprove that it’s flat, despite the overwhelming evidence it can provide, so you might as well choose whichever one, right?), so we should tell students there’s a 50-50 chance that it’s flat. Maybe demons really cause disease, so we should tell students there’s a 50-50 chance that this is true. Right?
bdgr–
There is a small but vocal group of scientists, led by a man named Peter Duesberg, who believe that the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) is NOT the cause of AIDS. Even so, this fact is probably (hopefully) taught in every health class in every high school in America.
Duesberg’s arguments are flawed, and his conclusions even moreso. Challenges to his hypothesis have never been satisfactorily answered. Even so, it would be hard to say that we have “proven” that HIV causes AIDS, even though the amount of evidence suggesting that conclusion is beyond staggering.
Does it bother you, then, that we are teaching this “theory” to kids in our high schools as if it were fact?
Ok bdgr, I’ll take a shot at asking what David was trying to get you to respond to.
If we shouldn’t require learning evolution in school because it may disagree with some fundamentalist’s view of creation, this means you think that religious beliefs should have effect on what science is, and is not, required learning in school. Correct?
If that is not correct, can you explain what is the objection to having evolution as a non-optional part of the curriculum?
If that is correct, then can you answer these questions?
Should we make learning history and archaeology elective, because they contradict the story of Noah and the flood?
Should we make learning astrophysics, astronomy, or even elementary physics elective because they contradict the story of Joshua and the sun standing still?
Should we make language studies elective because this contradicts the story of the Tower of Babel?
Now if the answer to any of these questions is “No”, then why? Since these sciences also contradict parts of the bible, why should they be exempt, and be taught as if they were “true”?
And if the answer to any of these is yes, then what about teaching other scientific theories that may contradict the teachings of other belief systems. After all, since only a small portion of Christians don’t believe in evolution, shouldn’t we be also careful of not treading on the beliefs of other small religious groups? And if not, why not?
God wants us all to consume all that citrus fruit He made. (Do you have any idea how much trouble it is to make an orange? Lemons are easy, but oranges…!)
Then why are you here? If you claim to be ignorant, and then claim to not care that you are ignorant, maybe you should go to another thread or message board entirely.
Because if I don’t know something, and don’t care enough about it to get to know it, I generally don’t spend much time talking about it.
See above.
**
See, that’s where you’re fibbing. Because you specifically said in this thread that the evidence does not “prove” evolution. As such, you refused to accept the mountain of evidence from almost every scientific discipline, both observed directly and inferred through logic, and how it all points to abiogenesis, evolution.
Now, either you accept the Theory of Evolution as a valid scientific theory (which is, as even the most laid of laypeople know, as close to a fact as science by the nature of the scientific method will allow) because the evidence is abundant and as clear as the nose on your face, or you refuse to accept the evidence.
It’s one or the other, Sparky. So please do tell which one it is? Because you’re doubling back on yourself here…
**
No, what you did was equate the teaching of science (evolution) as a threat to religious beliefs. You even claimed it as analagous as prayer in schools!
If you are going to make such a bold claim - that the teaching of evolution undermines religious beliefs - I want to see what exactly in these scientific teachings it says for you to make such a claim.
If there is nothing in the scientific teachings which undermines religion, which there isn’t incidentally, then you cannot claim what you have.
**
Meaning that some kids get an inferior education because of dogma? Sounds great if it’s a private school. An option quite available for anyone who wants stupid kids.
**
So some kids can get an inferior education, but not yours?
Also, if you want your kids to learn about something you also reject as even being true in the first place, what exactly is your point again?
**
**
Comparative religious courses would be swell, I agree! And guess what? They already exist in many Public schools. My fiancee took a Mythology course as a HS Sophomore which touched upon several different Creation Myths. It was an elective.
Now, if you want those Creation Myths taught in science class (elective or not), please provide some actual evidence that they happened, and I’m sure they will include it. Right after they give you the Nobel Prize we discussed earlier.
*TIME ELAPSED SINCE I QUIT SMOKING:
Ten months, two days, 2 hours, 8 minutes and 36 seconds.
12323 cigarettes not smoked, saving $1,540.65.
Extra life saved: 6 weeks, 18 hours, 55 minutes.
The history classes I took never really covered the flood thing. Don’t remember anything that would contradict them anyway.
[quote
2. Should we make learning astrophysics, astronomy, or even elementary physics elective because they contradict the story of Joshua and the sun standing still?
[/quote]
same as above.
Should we make language studies elective because this contradicts the story of the Tower of Babel?
Ugly
I don’t think they even had language studies offered at my school when I was in High School, and if they did, it would certainly have been an elective anyway.
Because I am not saying creationism is right, or that evolution is wrong. I am just saying that people have a right to raise there kids with whatever religious beliefs they want without the government telling their kids that they are wrong. How we got here is not important to me. How people are treated is important to me. Religious freedom is important to me. I didnt say that I agree with creationist, merely that I can see thier point.
I accept it is possible that that is the way things happened. Maybe even probable.
You asked where religion is mentioned. I said that I didnt know any and never claimed to. So lets be fair, this is a differant question. Evolution does NOT undermine my religious beliefs, but some people believe that it undermines THIER religious beliefs. Thier believe that the wolrd was created in a literal seven days, and probably the religious beliefs of some other relions I would imagine, since your other post mentioned a bunch of defferant ones.
When I was in school, most of science was offered as an elective. You got a few basic science classes, and if you wanted to study more, then you took biology etc. All I’m saying is move into one of the more advanced elective classes. I think in most peoples lives and careers it is not going to make any differance anyway.
That should be up to thier parents
I didn’t say it was false. My point I have now stated several times.
Sounds cool. Wish they had that when I was in school.
Evolution does NOT undermine my religious beliefs, but some people believe that it undermines THIER religious beliefs. Thier believe that the wolrd was created in a literal seven days, and probably the religious beliefs of some other relions I would imagine, since your other post mentioned a bunch of defferant ones.**
Okay, Bdgr, can you point to any text book on evolution or any teacher who states that evolution contradicts the idea that the world was created in 7 days? Please give us a citation for this.
bdgr was asked several questions (since he ignored my earlier ones, thanks to RJKUgly for stepping in and getting his attention) :
What?! How about the fact that you were never taught that the flood occurred? I mean, don’t you think a worldwide flood occurring less than 6000 years ago might have been noticed and therefore mentioned in history class?
And, of course, you still didn’t answer my questions, such as the one about Health class. You can’t wriggle out of that one as easily as you did regarding the AIDS deniers. I’ll ask yet again:
What happens when the next religious group says they believe in miracle healing, and therefore Health class shouldn’t be taught?
Ah, so you persist in mentioning that evolution is somehow undermining religious teachings, yet when I pointedly asked where in the teaching of science it said anything about God, Christianity or any faith and you said it didn’t.
So how is teaching something which says ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about religion infringing on religious beliefs?
**
Well, you can be ignorant if you wish. In fact, research into our origins has helped us immeasurably towards fighting diseases and viruses in the present. And teaching evolution is really the simplest way to show how the many varied scientific disciplines all work together to gether evidence to come up with conclusions. Really, evolution is both a great way to look to the future, as well as to teach science at its most basic. That’s why it is taught, you know.
**
Since you have yet to bring up anything that shows that the teaching of evolution gets in the ways of religious freedoms when there is nothing faith-based about any science, you really should give up this strawman at some point.
**
It is taught the latter way, though to be exact, it is taught as “as probable as the scientific method will allow (a scientific theory), which means it is a ‘fact’ as long as evidence continues to point to it being probable. When evidence starts to point to something else, we are prepared to modify or even dismiss the idea, but that is extremely unlikely.”
**
Yes, religion and science are totally different questions, Which is why it is maddening you keep getting them mixed up without a shred of evidence to back you up…
Ever heard of the Scopes Trial, maybe? Eighty or so years ago, it was shown that evolution had no quarrel with any religious principals. Your argument was answered way back then. As such, you might want to look into it.
**
So you are saying that what some - an indetermined number, apparently, meaning anywhere from a few folks on up - people BELIEVE should change how people examine FACTS?
Many other Dopers mentioned other cases analagous to this statement of yours, yet you didn’t answer them.
Many people believe that healthcare is unnecessary - Christian Scientists, for example. Do you feel that their taxes going towards hospitals and other emergency services are “undermining” their religious beliefs? Is teaching basic first aid in school as well?
You see, we open up that can of worms, and any irrational belief is suddenly taking precedence over FACTS, Sparky. And nothing gets done.
It is. There are a ton of private schools which are churning out ignorant kids, and you can even home-school your kids if you want.
But keep religious dogma away from the public schools, thanks.
*TIME ELAPSED SINCE I QUIT SMOKING:
Ten months, two days, 14 hours, 48 minutes and 23 seconds.
12344 cigarettes not smoked, saving $1,543.29.
Extra life saved: 6 weeks, 20 hours, 40 minutes.
You don’t ever remember being told that written history goes back 6000 years or more in cultures like China? And that they might have made some small mention of a flood that destroyed every living thing? You don’t ever recall hearing about ancient remains that go back tens of thousands of years? Things like bits of tools, pottery, gravesites, etc., which couldn’t possibly have survived a worldwide flood intact?
You don’t remember ever hearing about people like Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler, or Tycho Brahe? You were never taught that the Earth goes around the Sun and not the other way around? You don’t remember ever hearing of a person named Isaac Newton who said things like “Force = mass X acceleration”, and “Objects in motion tend to stay in motion”? And that means that the process of stopping the earth from spinning would have pretty much exploded it?
You don’t recall ever studying English (or whatever you first language may be) and hearing that it was “descended” from other languages? That it has roots in Latin, Greek, etc? That it can be traced back to older European languages, and the “evolution” can be seen quite clearly in many, many, cases? And that the same thing is pretty much true for all languages? And if this is the case, doesn’t this throw some doubt on the story of all humanity speaking the same language up to one day, when all of the other languages suddenly appear?
If your primary education was actually so weak (I was taught all of those things, some in elementary school, some in jr. high, and all of them again, but in more detail, in high school) then I can see why you wouldn’t care if anyone got a decent education. It would seen that yours wasn’t, so what does it matter if theirs is?
But even all that aside, it doesn’t address this:
You seem to saying here that it doesn’t matter to you whether evolution is the right or wrong answer (in fact in other places you seem to have said that you think it “probably” is the right answer) but that you don’t want to push it on anyone else who may think otherwise because of their faith and beliefs.
And even though you may never have been taught any of the things I mentioned above (or you don’t remember being taught them) most of us were. And they definitely cast doubt on various pieces of Judeo/Christian belief, and certainly on the beliefs of other religious groups as well.
And so the key question (the one Satan, David, and several others have been trying to get you to answer) is:
If your position is that the schools should not require learning about things that conflict with the beliefs of (even small) religious groups (remember, it doesn’t matter if you think they conflict, only that anyone else may think that), why shouldn’t the subjects that have been mentioned be treated the same way you say evolution should be treated? Why shouldn’t all of these things either not be taught, be taught with disclaimers that they are just guesses, or be taught as electives?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by David B *
**
What?! How about the fact that you were never taught that the flood occurred? I mean, don’t you think a worldwide flood occurring less than 6000 years ago might have been noticed and therefore mentioned in history class?
[\quote]
They never said anything about it one way or the other. THey didn’t outright deny it, or say it happened.
Well, I don’t have a good answer for that. Sorry. It is something to think about. Do you know of anyone that has such objections?
