Debate over evolution now allowed in Tenn. schools

[Dr.Drock]

LOL. At the very time that Micheal Behe coined this term, most of the examples he gave concerning 'irreducible complexity', such as the flaggelum, had been shown to be reducible.

And, for God's sake, why would you worship a God that had to constantly diddle with his creation to get it right?

He got it right? I'm a pretty optimistic person, but look at all the death and destruction humankind brings. It's easy sitting here in america to say he got it right, but not everywhere.

Well, one can accept pre-destination, or free will. That is why most of the founders of this nation were Diests, not Christians. They believed that a Diety created the universe, and what we make of it for ourselves is up to us.

True but giving free will to a better creation would've made more sense. Giving free will to a species who are also given natural instincts to survive and gain power, leaves a lot of people getting destroyed.

 

[Vidi]

No, it's sad and not the least bit funny. Only religious fanatics who are outraged that science refuses to validate bronze age campfire stories see this as a victory, it's embarrassing and a step back into ignorance and superstition. Next they will want the flat earth theory discussed on equal terms with Newton's laws of physics.

Well boy wonder lets have a debate on this? So creationsim is a campfire story, but you believe in the Big Bang Theory, dont you? So there is a small particle in space that just all of sudden explodesfor no reason and expands to become the universe. So if the universe is expanding, what is it expanding into? your turn!

Silly ass. Nobody 'believes' in evolution. They simply accept that the evidence is presently overwhelming that this is the way it happened. Evidence from geology, biology, and genetics.

As for the 'big bang', there is evidence for that, also. But zero evidence for a Diety waving his hand ( tenticle?, appendage of some sort? ) and poofing the universe into existance as it is.

Technically, one would have to "believe" it it, in order to reject another "belief"

Evidence of God is all around you. The problem is we are expected to believe in a seven 24 hour day creation when all evidence shows that not how it happened.

Biblically, btw, God didn't wave a hand. He spoke. And it happened.

As there is no evidence of what caused the Big Bang, ( though brane theory is promising ) God speaking is currently as viable as anything else.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Will the Tennessee schools include this theory in their debates?

Lakota Indian Legends - Lakota Creation Myth

An excellent idea. Beats the spontaneous irreducible complexity of a cell rising from primordial ooze mythology.

Yeah....right....what're the chances?​

"Breslow describes evidence supporting the idea that the unusual amino acids carried to a lifeless Earth by meteorites about 4 billion years ago set the pattern for normal amino acids with the L-geometry, the kind in terrestrial proteins, and how those could lead to D-sugars of the kind in DNA."

Advanced Dinosaurs/Other Planets​

....And, does it matter?​

 

[Vidi]

LOL. At the very time that Micheal Behe coined this term, most of the examples he gave concerning 'irreducible complexity', such as the flaggelum, had been shown to be reducible.

And, for God's sake, why would you worship a God that had to constantly diddle with his creation to get it right?

He got it right? I'm a pretty optimistic person, but look at all the death and destruction humankind brings. It's easy sitting here in america to say he got it right, but not everywhere.

Well, one can accept pre-destination, or free will. That is why most of the founders of this nation were Diests, not Christians. They believed that a Diety created the universe, and what we make of it for ourselves is up to us.

And I have no argument with that.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

You want all to accept the underlying validity of your untestable theories on blind faith, as fundamental tenets of scientific discussion, but deny a discussion on other possible competing theories.

Regardless of what theory ends up to be true, it is absolutely part of science.

Actually, it's not science, by definition. It's ABOUT science, but not science.

It IS great subject matter for philosophy, critical thought, etc.

If there was an intelligent force behind the creation of the universe, said force would have PLENTY to do with science.

But that is debatable.

Awwwwwwwwwwwwwwww......losin' your Faith.....a little-bit??

Yeah.....you're Hell-bound, alright.​

 

[bodecea]

A victory for freedom of thought and individualism in the school, and a stinging defeat for the secular mind police. We enjoy freedom of speech, not freedom from speech you find disagreeable.



'NASHVILLE, Tenn. -- A bill that encourages classroom debate over evolution will become law in Tennessee, despite a veto campaign mounted by scientists and civil libertarians who say it will reopen a decades-old controversy over teaching creationism to the state's schoolchildren.'

Tenn. governor allows evolution debate bill to become law

Imagine the lively debate and opening of minds which can now flourish in the previously flat-earther science rooms across Tenn, and hopefully the rest of America!

They never really did let go of that mentality we saw in "Inherit the Wind".

 

[buckeye45_73]

Science is about provable theories. So religous ones arent provable, but so far the Big Bang, evolution, ect havent been proven and I love how liberals act like they have. They are part of pseudoscience along with psycology, global warming, eugenics, and phrenology, ect.
Real science is newton, pascal, descartes, pasteur, einstein, ect

Check out the studies on accrylamide. They want to ban french fries, patato chips, because of accylamide, except that the rats (uh oh where is PETA on this one?) are exposed to a dose 900 fold what humans are in bag of chips. Real science indeed from the food nazis.

 

[Vidi]

Well there goes any Tennessean ever becoming a scientist ever again. Maybe they can turn the science departments of their universities into more seminaries, lord knows preachers contribute more to society that stupid scientists.

Seriously. Permitting a mere additional topic in high school debate will change the career path for all potential Tennessean scientists?



Gawd, that is hilarious..

Actually, the problem lies not with the duscussion but with the reaction TO the discussion.

If we present JudeoChristian Creationism along side Evolution, then we also have to present Hindu, Native American ( all of them ), Afrcan Tribe stories, Zorasterian, etc.

And you know what happens next?

Protests outside the school. People up in arms that THEIR belief system isn't the ONLY one presented, or isn't being presented in the detail it deseves.

By sticking to th science, it allows for parents to direct their children spiritually.

There's a very good reason for separation of Church and State. I don't want the State teaching my children about God. That's my job.

 

[8537]

Science is about provable theories..

Oh gawd. Here we go again...

No, science is not about provable theories. It's about testable hypotheses

 

[Dragon]

Science is about provable theories.

Incorrect. No theory in science has ever been proven. Some theories in science have been DISproven, however, and that must always be possible, as it is with evolution -- but NOT with creationism or intelligent design. And that is why these ideas have no place in a science classroom.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Science is about provable theories..

Oh gawd. Here we go again...

No, science is not about provable theories. It's about testable hypotheses

Well, at least with what these people know about science we can understand why they complain about science education .


They just need to put their motivation in another direction.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Conservatives want a world where when a fundamentalist terrorist flies a plane into a building because God told him to do it,

it will be because he learned it in science class.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If I were a person of faith the last thing I'd want would be to see that faith wrongly and inappropriately pitted against science.

 

[Dr.Drock]

If I were a person of faith the last thing I'd want would be to see that faith wrongly and inappropriately pitted against science.

If i were religious I would think i'd rather have a religous scholar teach my kid about god than a biology scholar.

 

[Vidi]

If I were a person of faith the last thing I'd want would be to see that faith wrongly and inappropriately pitted against science.

As a person of faith, I agree.

 

[Vidi]

If I were a person of faith the last thing I'd want would be to see that faith wrongly and inappropriately pitted against science.

If i were religious I would think i'd rather have a religous scholar teach my kid about god than a biology scholar.

The problem is the same as with history.

The TRUTH of faith or history is far too complex for the vast majority of children. It's far too bloody as well.

So it has to be watered down into easily memorable slogans like God is Love or Taxation without Representation.

Then those kids grow up and NEVER really delve any deeper, beyond the slogans.

You can go through thread after thread on this forum as see how many people stopped learning about these subject in the third grade.

And we wonder why we can't vote out the corruption in Washington? It begins with the people.

 

[PredFan]

You are never going to win against these people who support Creation. They view themselves as some kind of shining Palladin Warrior fighting the tide of evil for God. All of your logic and reason are dodged and parried with thier rightious sword. The more logic, facts, and reason you throw at them, the more closer they get to heaven. As long as they don't listen to any of it that is.

 

[boilermaker55]

And which creationism are we advocating to teach?
Native American? Christian? Buddhism?

A victory for freedom of thought and individualism in the school, and a stinging defeat for the secular mind police. We enjoy freedom of speech, not freedom from speech you find disagreeable.



'NASHVILLE, Tenn. -- A bill that encourages classroom debate over evolution will become law in Tennessee, despite a veto campaign mounted by scientists and civil libertarians who say it will reopen a decades-old controversy over teaching creationism to the state's schoolchildren.'

Tenn. governor allows evolution debate bill to become law

Imagine the lively debate and opening of minds which can now flourish in the previously flat-earther science rooms across Tenn, and hopefully the rest of America!

 

[boilermaker55]

True and then those that try to promote their religious convictions pick and choose the part of their belief that benefits them the most. When it becomes a little bit or work or sacrifice they toss it out the window.

You are never going to win against these people who support Creation. They view themselves as some kind of shining Palladin Warrior fighting the tide of evil for God. All of your logic and reason are dodged and parried with thier rightious sword. The more logic, facts, and reason you throw at them, the more closer they get to heaven. As long as they don't listen to any of it that is.

 

[Vidi]

You are never going to win against these people who support Creation. They view themselves as some kind of shining Palladin Warrior fighting the tide of evil for God. All of your logic and reason are dodged and parried with thier rightious sword. The more logic, facts, and reason you throw at them, the more closer they get to heaven. As long as they don't listen to any of it that is.

In a lot of cases, you're absolutely correct.

However, if you can first convince them that you are not attacking their faith, they can more open to reason. Not all mind you. But some.

Back someone into a wall, they'll come out swinging.