Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Crusades - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaThe myth that the numbers of people systematically killed in tne name of the Christian God in any way compares to the numbers killed in the name of Islam or Nazism is ludicrous.
Salem witch trials - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
And let's not get started on the Jews
Perhaps a Christian needs to teach you to spell. "Separate".
There is nothing wrong with sharing one's personal beliefs in the classroom. Teachers of all subjects talk about social issues all the time, and the issue of faith is just an extension of that. You won't ever see me saying they should teach creationism in PLACE of whatever subject is being taught (except in parochial schools, where the curriculum wraps around the bible and prayer) because kids are in particular classrooms to learn about particular subjects.
But IF children are being taught about the "theory" that we have evolved from a "common ancestor" that we share with other primates...a theory that has no basis in fact and is a complete guess based on the fact that we are all similar and share basic gene structure, then I see no thing wrong with touching on the theory, believed by a HUGE number of people in the world, that we were created by a creator. There should be no requirement that children believe this, any more than there's a requirement that they believe we're the grandchildren of Lucy; but they should know the theory exists, and not be taught the lie that it's myth, that it doesn't bear consideration, or that the people who believe it it are stuipd. It's about increasing knowledge, instead of limiting it, and it makes me ill people, claim that teaching children all the possilities somehow makes them more ignorant than withholding information. You don't enlighten children by refusing to give them information, or by passing on your personal opinion about things...in place of truth.
Here are some examples of possible evolution:
What can you show me of creation?
Those are pictures of "POSSIBLE" evolution.
I can also provide pictures of "POSSIBLE" creation...
Here's a picture of the "POSSIBLE" creation of man:
and here's a picture of a pyramid crystal which "POSSIBLY" has healing ability:
In other words, a bunch of pictures mean nothing in this instance. They have feature length films filled with fantastical animation of what the earth could POSSIBLY look like in thousands of year, too. Means nothing. It's just somebody's imagination run amock. Fun to look at, fun to condsider; but indicative of nothing real.
Where's you get this 6 Million number?Crusades - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaThe myth that the numbers of people systematically killed in tne name of the Christian God in any way compares to the numbers killed in the name of Islam or Nazism is ludicrous.
Salem witch trials - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
And let's not get started on the Jews
How many people died in the witch trials? 6 million?
And was that behavior decried or not? Why yes, it was.
If that's the best you have, you have nothing.
No, what you depicted is a POSSIBILITY, which has absolutely zero to do with the creation of life. Animals evolve, I've never disputed that. Look at dogs.Here are some examples of possible evolution:
What can you show me of creation?
Those are pictures of "POSSIBLE" evolution.
I can also provide pictures of "POSSIBLE" creation...
Here's a picture of the "POSSIBLE" creation of man:
and here's a picture of a pyramid crystal which "POSSIBLY" has healing ability:
In other words, a bunch of pictures mean nothing in this instance. They have feature length films filled with fantastical animation of what the earth could POSSIBLY look like in thousands of year, too. Means nothing. It's just somebody's imagination run amock. Fun to look at, fun to condsider; but indicative of nothing real.
The problem with what you showed and what I showed is that I can back up, with proof, what is depicted in the pictures.
Ah I see, you based your conclusion based on more than one person, citing one person as your definitive source. Do you realize how foolish that is? Do you even realize that there are medical students and different types of doctors with drastically different schedules?
You base the ENTIRETY of your poorly drawn conclusion on this short-sighted information. Tell me: how many hours of free time did your niece or other unnamed references have as a medical student? Give us an estimated number. Let's see you actually support what you say for once instead of making vague references you run behind.
Especially when I'm TYPING. You must love the sound of the ocean emanating from between your ears.Good lord you love the sound of your own voice, don't you?
False. Just curious: how would you feel if a science teacher talked about the benefits of homosexuality and abortion on a daily basis? It's just personal belief, right? Completely appropriate for a science classroom, right?There is nothing wrong with sharing one's personal beliefs in the classroom.
As I said: intellectually bankrupt.But IF children are being taught about the "theory" that we have evolved from a "common ancestor" that we share with other primates...a theory that has no basis in fact and is a complete guess based on the fact that we are all similar and share basic gene structure, then I see no thing wrong with touching on the theory, believed by a HUGE number of people in the world, that we were created by a creator. There should be no requirement that children believe this, any more than there's a requirement that they believe we're the grandchildren of Lucy; but they should know the theory exists, and not be taught the lie that it's myth, that it doesn't bear consideration, or that the people who believe it it are stuipd. It's about increasing knowledge, instead of limiting it, and it makes me ill people, claim that teaching children all the possilities somehow makes them more ignorant than withholding information. You don't enlighten children by refusing to give them information, or by passing on your personal opinion about things...in place of truth.
That's not how science works. You prove what's real, you don't prove things that are non-existent.Prove its a myth or shut the fuck up!
As if I really believe that! I know a guy who knew a medical student once from the south who never saw snow. I really doubt you are telling the truth based on my vast life experiences with REAL people who have experienced snow.Snowmageddon closed all our afternoon OB clinics, but I am wondering how the hell I am going to make it to morning rounds tomorrow.
Now the endless conundrum: Casefiles or couch?
And how would you answer when asked: If a student asked you about Intelligent Design while you were teaching evolution, what would you say?None of which is relevant to the thread.
If you are the highschool principal interviewing me to teach biology, in today's climate it would not be out of line for you to ask my views on Origin of the Species or Darwin's Theory.
I would answer truthfully that I would include that in Biology class and would teach it as valid science.
In today's climate it would also be reasonable to also ask if I would also teach Creationism in Biology cclass.
I would answer truthfully that I would not as I do not believe Creationism to be science or appropriate for Biology Class.
That should end the interview questions on that subject.
So later you show up to interview me for the village weekly newspaper serving a community who will be interested in the new guy teaching at the highschool. Ms. Foxfyre, you are certainly aware of all the controversy re those pushing for Creationism to be included in the school curriculum. Are you a Creationist?
I would answer truthfully that yes I am. I believe there is a Creator who called all that we have into being and a divine intelligence behind the whole process. That makes me both a Creationist and an I.D.er.
If the reporter is honest and dedicated to reporting the facts with accuracy, he will follow with: "Would you be teaching that to our students in Biology Class."
I would answer truthfully that no I would not because it is a matter of religious belief or faith that has no place in a Science curriculum.
That should make me satisfactory for all but the few fundamentalists at the little church in the hollow who refute Evolution and want only Creationism taught. But they will be greatly outnumbered and overruled.
However, my answers have not been satisfactory for many of our more militant anti-religionists or anti-Christians who do not seem to be able to understand my answers and want to make me into something that I am not and who accuse me of wanting or intending what I do not.
And THAT is the truth of the issues on this thread.
No, what you depicted is a POSSIBILITY, which has absolutely zero to do with the creation of life. Animals evolve, I've never disputed that. Look at dogs.Those are pictures of "POSSIBLE" evolution.
I can also provide pictures of "POSSIBLE" creation...
Here's a picture of the "POSSIBLE" creation of man:
and here's a picture of a pyramid crystal which "POSSIBLY" has healing ability:
In other words, a bunch of pictures mean nothing in this instance. They have feature length films filled with fantastical animation of what the earth could POSSIBLY look like in thousands of year, too. Means nothing. It's just somebody's imagination run amock. Fun to look at, fun to condsider; but indicative of nothing real.
The problem with what you showed and what I showed is that I can back up, with proof, what is depicted in the pictures.
That doesn't mean there's no God. I wish you loons would quit pretending it does.
As if I really believe that! I know a guy who knew a medical student once from the south who never saw snow. I really doubt you are telling the truth based on my vast life experiences with REAL people who have experienced snow.Snowmageddon closed all our afternoon OB clinics, but I am wondering how the hell I am going to make it to morning rounds tomorrow.
Now the endless conundrum: Casefiles or couch?
Especially when I'm TYPING. You must love the sound of the ocean emanating from between your ears.Good lord you love the sound of your own voice, don't you?
False. Just curious: how would you feel if a science teacher talked about the benefits of homosexuality and abortion on a daily basis? It's just personal belief, right? Completely appropriate for a science classroom, right?There is nothing wrong with sharing one's personal beliefs in the classroom.
As I said: intellectually bankrupt.
That's not how science works. You prove what's real, you don't prove things that are non-existent.Prove its a myth or shut the fuck up!
As if I really believe that! I know a guy who knew a medical student once from the south who never saw snow. I really doubt you are telling the truth based on my vast life experiences with REAL people who have experienced snow.Snowmageddon closed all our afternoon OB clinics, but I am wondering how the hell I am going to make it to morning rounds tomorrow.
Now the endless conundrum: Casefiles or couch?
as an atheist I have no problem with religion being taught, just not in science class
Instead of Science class, could always replace it with Miracles class.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-agl0pOQfs
We don't have to keep it separate, and there's no reason to.
there is no room for myths in science instruction
Really?
Guess we need to get rid of all the "theories". Theory is really just another word for "guess".
Really? Hmmm. Looking at my college transcript. Biology - two years - A. (I only needed one but I loved biology.) Chemistry - B - I wasn't as good with inert substances. Physics - A. And I did substitute teach for awhile until the rules changed requiring teacher certification. The science teachers liked me to sub in their classes and asked for me.
So perhaps you might want to back off the personal insults. They make you look really small and petty.
And I'm still waiting for you to comment on my post directed to your Bible commentary. Is there a reason you have avoided that despite it being called to your attention two or three times now?
I've got a full year of college biology, and a full term of genetics.
.
-and Bush2 went to Yale...
Perhaps a Christian needs to teach you to spell. "Separate".
There is nothing wrong with sharing one's personal beliefs in the classroom. Teachers of all subjects talk about social issues all the time, and the issue of faith is just an extension of that. You won't ever see me saying they should teach creationism in PLACE of whatever subject is being taught (except in parochial schools, where the curriculum wraps around the bible and prayer) because kids are in particular classrooms to learn about particular subjects.
But IF children are being taught about the "theory" that we have evolved from a "common ancestor" that we share with other primates...a theory that has no basis in fact and is a complete guess based on the fact that we are all similar and share basic gene structure, then I see no thing wrong with touching on the theory, believed by a HUGE number of people in the world, that we were created by a creator. There should be no requirement that children believe this, any more than there's a requirement that they believe we're the grandchildren of Lucy; but they should know the theory exists, and not be taught the lie that it's myth, that it doesn't bear consideration, or that the people who believe it it are stuipd. It's about increasing knowledge, instead of limiting it, and it makes me ill people, claim that teaching children all the possilities somehow makes them more ignorant than withholding information. You don't enlighten children by refusing to give them information, or by passing on your personal opinion about things...in place of truth.
Here are some examples of possible evolution:
What can you show me of creation?
Those are pictures of "POSSIBLE" evolution.
I can also provide pictures of "POSSIBLE" creation...
Here's a picture of the "POSSIBLE" creation of man:
and here's a picture of a pyramid crystal which "POSSIBLY" has healing ability:
In other words, a bunch of pictures mean nothing in this instance. They have feature length films filled with fantastical animation of what the earth could POSSIBLY look like in thousands of year, too. Means nothing. It's just somebody's imagination run amock. Fun to look at, fun to condsider; but indicative of nothing real.
