It’s pretty short-sighted of fundamentalist christians to think that G-d can’t be a little more subtle than just saying “Poof!” and everything is all there in its present form. How are they going to explain away things like fossil records?
‘Oh Shit Toto, we are back in Kansas!!’ - Quote from an old Mike Peter’s cartoon, now all the more appropriate. sigh
Am glad I don’t live there.
>>Being Chaotic Evil means never having to say your sorry…unless the other guy is bigger than you.<<
—The dragon observes
CK: Yeah, I was just saying that before they try to trash something that I believe in, they should know that what they believe in isn’t exactly rock-solid either. BTW, there was a movement a while back to teach creationism alongside evolution. Which is where (in my initial anger) the last comment came from.
The religious groups who want evolution banned in the schools (or at least the word evolution) are doing exactly what they tell us not to do with the Bible. They’re picking and choosing what to teach and what to let alone.
In other words, yeah, species can adapt to their environment, but we are not descended from monkeys!(insert Bible thumping here) Sheesh. It’s not like science made this up just to corrupt their kids.
I’m thankful that my Bio teacher had the guts to tackle evolution in our class. To my knowlege, not much in science is taught as solid fact. Evolution is a theory. So far, it holds water. Physics is theory, but it accurately models our world.
Whose prayer, Adam? Will you rotate religious prayers based on student enrollment? I don’t go to school for prayer (that’s what church is for), I go for education. I’ll make you a deal. When you get to force me to listen to prayer, then I’ll get to force the theory of evolution on you. OK?
“I’m not confused, I’m just well mixed”
–Robert Frost
[[Hey, I think it’s awesome that the school is getting rid of evolution in the classroom.]] Arg
Yeah, because “God” surely wants “His” children to be ignorant bozos with a deep misunderstanding of science.
[[ Perhaps, one day, they’d put prayer back in schools too. ALL schools. ]]
Yeah!!! Even the ones where the parents don’t want it!
Adam apparently erased Hebrews 13:17 from his Bible.
Anyway, Adam, tell me, based on your (I’m sure) wide home-school instruction in biology, which of the following statements, if any, you disagree with:
-
Living creatures contain a substance called DNA, which encodes the information for making another creature of the same type.
-
Many living creatures often combine their DNA with that of another of their type to create offspring.
-
Because of this combination, and because of the possibility of errors in copying, most offpsring differ slightly from their parents, and some differ in major ways.
-
All living creatures compete with each other to find mates, and to feed from and live among limited resources.
-
Some creatures are more likely than others, for whatever reason, to find food, living space, mates or some combination thereof.
-
Those creatures that are unsuccessful in finding mates will not combine their DNA with anyone else’s; those that are successful, will.
Ok, I opened up a whole can of worms with my statement about prayers in school. Now I wish I hadn’t said that. Let’s just say that I wish that they would allow freedom of religion in schools, but then we get into the whole church and state thing, and on this subject, I’m very ignorant, so I don’t think I’m going to say anything else about prayer in schools. (Yes, I’m dodging the question…er…topic)
Now the topic of evolution is a different story, right? I will not argue that species today can adapt. But, I have huge problems with the Big Bang thoery, and the belief that all of us came from some primordial ooze. THIS is what I believe is poppycock, and shouldn’t be taught in schools.
Tell me, honestly, how will not learning about the Big Bang and the origin of life affect the studies of a MD. Or, will not learning about that stuff affect a biologist?
Schools will never stop teaching evolution, so all of you have nothing to worry about. But I’m just asking if somebody could survive in the field of science today, without ever hearing of Charles Darwin. (Well, except paleontology, or anthropology…or studies along those lines)
Adam
I can respect that you think Big Bang (which is supported by observations of the universe) and us coming from primordial ooze is “poppycock”, but why? Please don’t say because the bible says so.
To rephrase for clarity: You are saying that Big Bang and other evolution stuff doesn’t make sense to you. It isn’t presumably in your view logical. What is it about these things that seems illogical to you?
Question #2: Can you see a parallel between your seeing these things as illogical and making no sense, and atheists who say that God makes no sense?
[[Let’s just say that I wish that they would allow freedom of religion in schools, but then we get into the whole church and state thing, and on this subject, I’m very ignorant, so I don’t think I’m going to say anything else about prayer in schools.]] Arg
Of course, FTR, they DO allow freedom of religion in public schools. What “they” don’t allow is for the government to use its resources (including comulsory attendance) to foster religious belief in impressionable young children. Children can pretty much pray on their own initiative all they want in school, wear fish pins, you name it.
ARG, what we have now is freedom of religion in our schools. You’re free to pray or otherwise non-disruptively practice your religion in school. What you are NOT allowed to do is enforce your religion on other people. The government is not allowed to tell you how to pray or require you to pray. Why do you assume if “prayer was returned to schools” the prayer would be to your liking? I’m willing to bet that fundementalists of your ilk would be the first to holler if mandatory prayer was returned to public schools because the prayer used did not meet your doctrinal interpretation.
I just find it hard to understand why people who have strong religious beliefs think it would be a good thing for the government to madate religious practice. It’s OK for the government abnegate religious freedom so long as it’s your religion that’s being imposed on everyone.
“Owls will deafen us with their incessant hooting!” W. Smithers
ARG220 wrote:
You know what, Adam? For once, I agree with you. I wish that kids in school could really be free to practice their religion.
I wish that pagan students could wear the pentacle to school if they chose, without fear of its being confiscated as “gang insignia.” I wish that possessing a book on witchcraft at school were not considered an offense subject to discipline.
I wish that schools who want their students to be moral would actually start teaching and demonstrating morality, instead of posting the Ten Christian Commandments and assuming that all the students will instantly start behaving themselves.
If people say they want religious freedom, this means ALL religions. I wish they would realize that.
It will affect them in the same way that not learning about Mozart will affect someone who currently plays in a jazz band. . . It will affect them in the same way that not learning about Monet will affect someone who paints today. . . Perhaps most importantly here, it will affect them in the same way that not learning about other religious beliefs will affect someone who tries to teach others about his or her own religious beliefs.
In short, it will affect them by making their education less complete, and therefore making them potentially less effective at what they do.
Rich
The decision of the Education board was stupid. But I believe High School kids are mature enough to make sensible opinions on this subject.
I hear Kansas is actually admitting also that this is a country run by the people, for the people, and of the people!What some folks will believe…
Ok, here’s what irritates me about evolution. It takes God out of the equation. That’s the bottom line. It says that the universe, and everything in it were formed out of nothing.
Tell me, honestly, how does absolute nothingness become something? Anything. Instead of saying that God (or some great being) CREATED something out of nothing, evolutionists just say that it happened upon chance.
I wonder, what the chances are, mathematically, of random “particles” becoming the elements of the universe. what are the chances of them just bumping together in the vastness of space, and forming atoms, and elements. I think those monkeys have a far better chance of typing out Hamlet. And what of those random elements becoming amino acids. And then what are the chances there would be four basic amino acids coming together and forming DNA. And what are the unbelievable odds that that simple tiny strand of DNA would figure out, all by itself to copy itself, and then copy itself again. And what are the chances that an amoeba would be formed, much less the infinite complexity of a insect, or a mammal for goodness sake.
You see, for me, and many others, it’s far more logical that God created those amino acids, and those amoebas. And that He created those dinosaurs, and those fossils of the trilobite.
Evolution asks many questions, but rarely does one find answers. Where are all the millions of lissing links? If species are constantly adapting to increase their rate of survival, then how do you explain the Giant Panda (who has the most inefficient digestive tract of any mammal), or the California Condor, who lays one egg every two years. (Or something like that.)
And the most important question, where did all those vast particles in space come from? The Big Bang?
Creationism has the answer. It was by the mighty hand of God that everything you see was formed.
I’m not speaking to those who believe that God put the universe in motion, then let “evolution” take it’s course. I’m asking these questions to the ones who took God out of the the equation totally. It’s that belief that I find…impossible to believe.
Adam
Science is not supposed to teach WHY the Universe got the way it is. That’s religion’s job. Science is supposed to teach HOW the universe got the way it is.
The only people who are asserting that “science is attacking religion” are a bunch of cracker preachers who have no real faith themselves! These crackers got into religion because , in their tiny hillbilly towns, preachers had status and power. And they wanted that power! Power over the minds, beliefs and even the lives of the people in that community.These people saw education as a threat. It gives folks the ability to see through the BS the cracker preachers spout, and do without these false priests.
A REAL man of faith does not need to oppress others . His faith comes from within, and is based on a desire to serve others; and thereby serve God. Attacking science education is an attack on our children’s future. If evolution is strictened from our books and schools, soon all science will be strickened. As well as art, music , literature, philosophy and anything else except a ‘religion’ that would be FALSE! False, because it would be enforced by law–by the police powers of the state—by violence.
If you don’t believe this is possible, remember what happened to Galileo–he observed the univers through a telescope; saw things that contradicted the Church’s teachings, and was punished for speaking the truth by being imprisoned for life!
REMEMBER–the Spanish Inquisition! They tortured anyone they could catch if they did not agree with the Church’s religious doctrine!
REMEMBER—the religious wars of Europe, where whole towns were exterminated because in the struggle between Protestant & Catholic they had the hard luck to choose to pray in the wrong church.
Our Founding Fathers remembered these things and more. SO THEY SEPARATED CHURCH AND STATE!
And thus spared us vast ammounts of bloodshed. Now some callow, unthinking fools want to undo this.
May God save us from the people who loudly proclaim that they serve Him, for they have never met Him, and they would destroy us all.
How does absolute nothingness become God, who then creates the universe?
Seriously. Why God? Or perhaps, how God? How is it that the concept of God makes more sense than the Big Bang? Answer this without reference to faith, as in “that’s just what I believe”. Why is an omniscient, omnipresent being somehow more reasonable than natural processes amounting to the universe as it is today?
By the way, in this thread and the one in Great Debates, the big bang keeps getting brought up along with evolution. I wasn’t aware that the two were ever tied together explicitly. I realize there’s a good fit, but I don’t think evolution is in any way dependent upon the big bang for its premises or conclusions. The conflation of the two seems to get at the heart of fundamentalists insecurity about both: the lack of God in the equation.
Adam stated:
So what your saying is that God has a pretty wide sadistic streak messing up the poor panda and condor like that. After all he is all-powerful and all-knowing, what’s the excuse for the shoddy work in this case?
To Adam/ARG, Re: your particle junk:
Natural selection is not random, nor does it operate by chance. Natural selection preserves the gains and eradicates the mistakes. There are hundreds, if not thousands of intermediate steps, some of which still occur in nature.
According to author Michael Shermer, in order for the monkey to type Hamlet’s soliloquy by chance, it would take 26 to the power of 13 trials for success. But if each correct letter is preserved and each incorrect letter is eradicated, then the process is much faster. Richard Hardison in 1988 wrote a computer program in which the letters were selected for or against, which is much the way genes are selected for/against.
It took an average of only 335.2 trials to produce the sequence of letters TOBEORNOTTOBE. It took about 90 seconcds. The entire play can be selected in only 4.5 days.
Sigh . . . The so called “Missing links” are there. There are plently of transitional fossils. Just look at the Archeopteryx, part reptile/part bird. Also the Ambuloecteus natans-- an example of the transition from land mammal to whale. We also have oodles of human transitional fossils.
Here’s how I explain the condor and the panda: they have evolved to suit their present environment. The panda may not need a better digestive system . . . he is suited to his environment, or even now is still in the process of changing to meet his environment. Species that have remained virtually unchanged for millions of years, such as the horseshoe crabs, sharks and the like have merely met the needs of their unchanging environment. They have evolved to the point where change is no longer needed, because their environment is stable and unchanging, while other marine species have changed rapidly and dramatically to suit their needs.
There is not one blueprint suiting all species that dictates how often they breed, how they digest or ANYTHING for that matter. Biodiversity is so amazingly complex. If God created all of the species, why didn’t He create them to all breed and function in the same manner? Are you saying that God goofed when he made the panda’s faulty digestive tract? Why would He give a species a faulty system?
You find evolution/science hard to believe because you’ve never been properly exposed to any of it. If you sit there saying to yourself, “Well, you can explain your science to me, but I’m not buying it because I believe that God did it,” you won’t learn a thing. And if you are the kind of person who would turn a blind eye to evidence, logic and reasoning, then you are pathetic indeed. I am open to learning about all theories. I will not automaticly discard knowledge because it doesn’t fit my preconceived notion of the way things are. I don’t fear challenges to my beliefs. Only ignorant people are. Lack of knowledge on a subject is understandable, but ignorance is unforgivable. Because ignorant people don’t WANT to learn.
Your faith is strong. Surely it wouldn’t be shaken by reading a few books on evolutionary theory.
I’ll admit that evolutionary theory can’t explain everything, if you’ll just admit that neither can the Bible. I am not afraid to question inconsistancies in science, but you won’t question the inconsistancies in your belief that God created this world for his amusement.
It does? How do you figure that? Ask a scientist someday what was around before the Big Bang. Wait I can save you the trouble and answer it for what most scientists are likely to say: “I don’t know”.
It could be that before the Big Bang there was the Big Crunch (the end of the “previous” universe), but according to our best current knowledge it looks like our universe will expand forever, and since our universe is presumably the same “stuff” as the previous universe then the Big Crunch seems unlikely. So, suggesting evolution or the Big Bang has nothing to do with taking God out of the picture. Maybe God created the Big Bang. Certainly, one thing is absolutely and totally clear:
If there is God then he certainly made a universe which at a minimum appears to be created from a Big Bang, and he certainly made it at a minimum appear that we evolved from lower orders of life. How acknowledging what God’s world looks like is an attack on religion is beyond me.
As stated by others, if this is the sort of games that God plays (i.e. making it BAD to examine the universe and find the discoveries that God made) then this only solidifies me more that either God doesn’t exist or I want no part of God’s “plan”.
And another thing …
once more I love how certain religous types state that when the bible/religious teaching are contradicted by “extremely proven” science then the claim is “Well, the bible is just being poetic”.
BUT is there is the remotest chance of poking the smallest holes in a theory (NOT a hypothesis) then the claim is “Well, the bible is being literal, and your science is an attack on my religion.” GOOD GRIEF!
Somebody PLEASE invent a time machine so we can put all of this to rest! Although one would wonder it the religious types would claim that the time machine is actually a hallucination and any evidence gathered by it is suspect.