Creationists suffer another legal defeat

[Sky Dancer]

That's step 2. Once you make something up then claim that you are smarter and that's why no one understands you. Good one!

If you studied science instead of religion you'd understand. Creationism belongs to religion class, not science class. Science needs evidence, not mythology.

yep. in a thousand years, all of the hebrew religions will be lumped in the same category as we think of ancient religions now.

I just found this source about creation myths. Adam and Eve is NOT something to teach in science class:
Creation Myths

 

[SmarterThanHick]

We can't but that doesn't matter. It is science if they say so.

Spoken like a true ignorant hick: someone who has no scientific education or understanding returning to the idea of "it I don't personally understand it, they're making it up". Here's a hint: scientists are smarter than you.

That's step 2. Once you make something up then claim that you are smarter and that's why no one understands you. Good one!

So this is how you justify your ignorance and believe all those qualified educated people who have studies these topics for their entire lives are just making stuff up. Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

 

[Sky Dancer]

Spoken like a true ignorant hick: someone who has no scientific education or understanding returning to the idea of "it I don't personally understand it, they're making it up". Here's a hint: scientists are smarter than you.

That's step 2. Once you make something up then claim that you are smarter and that's why no one understands you. Good one!

So this is how you justify your ignorance and believe all those qualified educated people who have studies these topics for their entire lives are just making stuff up. Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

Yeah, as if creation myths aren't 'made up'. BTW Buddhism has no creation myths and the Dalai Lama has said he will give up “any part of Buddhism that is contradicted by scientific fact.”

If scientific analysis were conclusively to demonstrate certain claims in Buddhism to be false,” he says, “then we must accept the findings of science and abandon those claims.”

He rejects so-called scientific materialism — the idea that consciousness, for example, is no more than a series of chemical reactions in our brains. That wouldn’t allow for reincarnation.

Davidson of the University of Wisconsin says at some point, science and Buddhism must take separate paths.

“There are certainly beliefs in traditional Buddhism that conflict with basic principles of scientific understanding,” Davidson says. “We can’t make sense of those beliefs in any kind of scientific framework.”
http://paradigmamalgamation.wordpre...inspired-by-the-dalai-lama-studies-happiness/

 

[JakeStarkey]

The Light and those who think Creationism is science are wrong, period. That's not my opinion. That is the absolute truth. Teach ID and Creationism anywhere but the science class. A local science teacher wanted to teach ID in biology class, and the principle, the assistant superintendent of instruction, the superintendent, and the board told her no. She is much happier up at _______ Academy High School now, and our public school kids are not being confused between physics and metaphysics.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

QW, one can verify water exists AND define it. Creationism can't do that because its philosophy is metaphysical and untestable by the scientific method. Teach it in liberal arts or humanities or philosophy or comparative religion classes, but never ever never in a science classroom: why? it is not science.

I never said it could not be defined, I am just saying it is a lot easier to just point at it and let the person figure it out for themselves.

Truth, on the other hand, only works if you figure it out for yourself. If I simply tell you something is true, then you don't learn how to figure it out for yourself, and the only way to get truth for yourself is to work it out on your own. That is why science has you repeat the experiments others have already conducted, and look for yourself where experimentation is impossible, because it is the only way to get to truth. It cannot be defined.

 

[THE LIGHT]

Spoken like a true ignorant hick: someone who has no scientific education or understanding returning to the idea of "it I don't personally understand it, they're making it up". Here's a hint: scientists are smarter than you.

That's step 2. Once you make something up then claim that you are smarter and that's why no one understands you. Good one!

If you studied science instead of religion you'd understand. Creationism belongs to religion class, not science class. Science needs evidence, not mythology.

I have studied science. And you?

 

[Sky Dancer]

That's step 2. Once you make something up then claim that you are smarter and that's why no one understands you. Good one!

If you studied science instead of religion you'd understand. Creationism belongs to religion class, not science class. Science needs evidence, not mythology.

I have studied science. And you?

Creationism is religion, not science. Adam and Eve do not belong in science class.

 

[THE LIGHT]

Spoken like a true ignorant hick: someone who has no scientific education or understanding returning to the idea of "it I don't personally understand it, they're making it up". Here's a hint: scientists are smarter than you.

That's step 2. Once you make something up then claim that you are smarter and that's why no one understands you. Good one!

So this is how you justify your ignorance and believe all those qualified educated people who have studies these topics for their entire lives are just making stuff up. Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

Which ones are more educated...the ones that you agree with or the ones you don't?

Please let me know how you arrive at your conclusion.

 

[blu]

If you studied science instead of religion you'd understand. Creationism belongs to religion class, not science class. Science needs evidence, not mythology.

I have studied science. And you?

Creationism is religion, not science. Adam and Eve do not belong in science class.

but adam and steve do!

 

[THE LIGHT]

If you studied science instead of religion you'd understand. Creationism belongs to religion class, not science class. Science needs evidence, not mythology.

I have studied science. And you?

Creationism is religion, not science. Adam and Eve do not belong in science class.

That was not my question. I understand you do not like Christianity, and that is your free will to "believe" that way. But have you studied science?

 

[Sky Dancer]

That's step 2. Once you make something up then claim that you are smarter and that's why no one understands you. Good one!

So this is how you justify your ignorance and believe all those qualified educated people who have studies these topics for their entire lives are just making stuff up. Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

Which ones are more educated...the ones that you agree with or the ones you don't?

Please let me know how you arrive at your conclusion.

Creationism is mythology, not science. One can be a scientist or a learned mythologist or spiritual seeker. Both are worthy of respect.

 

[Sky Dancer]

I have studied science. And you?

Creationism is religion, not science. Adam and Eve do not belong in science class.

That was not my question. I understand you do not like Christianity, and that is your free will to "believe" that way. But have you studied science?

I like Christianity just fine. I love studying comparative religion. I just don't choose to study it in a science class. That's ok with me. I have enough for both of us. (BTW Buddhism has no creation myths.) Christians don't get to impose their creation myths in a public school science class. There is no science that backs up creation mythology--for example, Adam and Eve.

I have studied science--in high school and college. Next.

 

[dilloduck]

So this is how you justify your ignorance and believe all those qualified educated people who have studies these topics for their entire lives are just making stuff up. Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

Which ones are more educated...the ones that you agree with or the ones you don't?

Please let me know how you arrive at your conclusion.

Creationism is mythology, not science. One can be a scientist or a learned mythologist or spiritual seeker. Both are worthy of respect.

How about reincarnation ?

 

[Sky Dancer]

Which ones are more educated...the ones that you agree with or the ones you don't?

Please let me know how you arrive at your conclusion.

Creationism is mythology, not science. One can be a scientist or a learned mythologist or spiritual seeker. Both are worthy of respect.

How about reincarnation ?

Reincarnation is a topic that doesn't belong in a science class. I am not into reincarnation but I am into rebirth as a spiritual topic. Reincarnation and rebirth are different.

 

[dilloduck]

Creationism is mythology, not science. One can be a scientist or a learned mythologist or spiritual seeker. Both are worthy of respect.

How about reincarnation ?

Reincarnation is a topic that doesn't belong in a science class. I am not into reincarnation but I am into rebirth as a spiritual topic. Reincarnation and rebirth are different.

Christian rebirth ?

 

[THE LIGHT]

Creationism is religion, not science. Adam and Eve do not belong in science class.

That was not my question. I understand you do not like Christianity, and that is your free will to "believe" that way. But have you studied science?

I like Christianity just fine. I love studying comparative religion. I just don't choose to study it in a science class. That's ok with me. I have enough for both of us. (BTW Buddhism has no creation myths.) Christians don't get to impose their creation myths in a public school science class. There is no science that backs up creation mythology--for example, Adam and Eve.

I have studied science--in high school and college. Next.

I don't think either should be taught in schools so I guess we can meet half way on that one.

What is your problem with Adam and Eve?

 

[THE LIGHT]

So this is how you justify your ignorance and believe all those qualified educated people who have studies these topics for their entire lives are just making stuff up. Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

Which ones are more educated...the ones that you agree with or the ones you don't?

Please let me know how you arrive at your conclusion.

Creationism is mythology, not science. One can be a scientist or a learned mythologist or spiritual seeker. Both are worthy of respect.

That is a nice montra but what is it that makes evolutionism science and creation not science?

 

[THE LIGHT]

Creationism is mythology, not science. One can be a scientist or a learned mythologist or spiritual seeker. Both are worthy of respect.

How about reincarnation ?

Reincarnation is a topic that doesn't belong in a science class. I am not into reincarnation but I am into rebirth as a spiritual topic. Reincarnation and rebirth are different.

So you believe in something you don't think is scientifically possible?

 

[Sky Dancer]

How about reincarnation ?

Reincarnation is a topic that doesn't belong in a science class. I am not into reincarnation but I am into rebirth as a spiritual topic. Reincarnation and rebirth are different.

So you believe in something you don't think is scientifically possible?

I didn't say that.

 

[dilloduck]

Reincarnation is a topic that doesn't belong in a science class. I am not into reincarnation but I am into rebirth as a spiritual topic. Reincarnation and rebirth are different.

So you believe in something you don't think is scientifically possible?

I didn't say that.

A buddhist arguing about religion in schools. Does the Dalai Lama encourage this ?