Palin wants creationism taught in schools

[Shogun]

Just use the term "Intelligent Design" and don't allow any religious doctrine to be in the texts or discussion.

"intelligent design" is STILL a METAPHYSICAL concept. It fails in a class about PHYSICAL science.

 

[Shogun]

Like I said before. Teach it as Intelligent Design. There isn't any religion associated with ID. There is plenty of science to back up ID.

please.. by all means.. POST some of that evidence then.

 

[Shogun]

Evolution is basically just pseudo science. It's an untestable theory, full of huge gaps in both science and logic.

Saddy, the American public thinks it has been proven by hard facts and evidence,

Nothing could be farther from the truth!!

yea.. geology is just a fabrication too, eh?

 

[Shogun]

"Singularity" is the scientific term used by scientists to describe the very first event in the universe that got everything statred.

In layman's terms, it means: "we don't have a clue!!"

yea, I KNOW! ASTRONOMY and an expanding universe sure is a fucking unobserved theory!

 

[Shogun]

That nonsense is taught as a fact. When actually, there is more evidence that Santa Clause is real, than that man evolved from an ape ancester.

HA!

yea... skulls from neanderthals! JUST a FIGMENT of our collective imagination!

 

[DiamondDave]

Waiting for the evidence of the singularity and the precursor to the 'big bang' then, shogun.... I guess you can't talk about your theories unless you show that evidence... you have just as much faith dealing with those things as you do in a belief in god, it is just that you wish to worship at the altar of science with huge leaps of faith... because science has NEVER got it wrong and science has a proven explanation for everything...


The thing is... I am all for teaching the evolution theory, as I am teaching the big bang theory... but with a stipulation that it should be told to the students that yes, these are only scientific theories and that in no way is it mean to go against their own personal beliefs in terms of religion, etc

 

[Shogun]

Actually, it takes "MORE" faith to believe in evolution, than to believe in creation.

HA!

yea.. sure, dude.. if only that pesky fucking evidence wasn't around!

 

[DiamondDave]

HA!

yea... skulls from neanderthals! JUST a FIGMENT of our collective imagination!

Funny... of all the shows and all the books I have read... never heard neanderthal described as an ape, shogun.... rather an advanced brother/sister species who simply died out for reasons still unknown

 

[Caligirl]

If individuals on a message board believe the bible describes biodiversity better than the scientific process does, that's way less important than whether the courts agree. The courts do not.

Now, someday, the courts might be convinced that ID and creationism are on equal footing with science. On the day the courts have the difficulty following the line of thought that demonstrates beyond any doubt that creationism/ID is not science, and decide to put religion first, and teach a religion (a single religion) as equal to science, then we will join Iran in becoming a truly theocratic state.

There's a nice thought.

 

[Shogun]

What do you offer that the big bang is anything other than fantasy? Or that man evolved from Apes? Or that life sprang from rocks?

And expanding universe (astronomy), neanderthal skulls and geologic time, the FACT of adaptation, husbandry and mutation, life being found at volcanic vents in the ocean, digit bones in whale fins.. need more? I'll play this evidence game with you all day long. Be sure to offer YOUR evidence for creationism.

 

[Caligirl]

Funny... of all the shows and all the books I have read... never heard neanderthal described as an ape, shogun.... rather an advanced brother/sister species who simply died out for reasons still unknown

Man is also an ape, silly.

 

[DiamondDave]

Man is also an ape, silly.

No... we are a hominid

 

[Caligirl]

The question of origin of life has more to do with redox gradients (see chemistry at hydrothermal vents) than rocks and water.

To call it rocks and water shows a complete lack of knowledge about the current state of research on the matter, and a bias besides.

Anyone that really wants to make a compelling argument that life must have been created by God should do a better job researching the state of research in the area. Otherwise, those people just sound ignorant of what places like MIT and Caltech and Harvard and Cambridge and etc etc etc are uncovering.

 

[Shogun]

There is NO evidence of one. And using the DNA game we and Mice must have evolved from a single source also. But hey I am sure there is a mouse/ape like creature out there somewhere. We just haven't turned over enough rocks to find it.

As for how life started, read the scientific theory on it. The planet was a barren rock with water on it and from the action of water with rock somehow life was formed.

Have you seen a fucking trilobite lately? wanna pretend that there never was such a creature?

Indeed, live just CAN'T happen around volcanic vents, eh?

Found: 37,000! New Extremophile Marine Microbes …free your imagination…

 

[Caligirl]

No... we are a hominid

The great apes are the members of the biological family Hominidae which includes humans, chimpanzees, gorillas, and orangutans.[1][2]

Great ape - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[DiamondDave]

And expanding universe (astronomy), neanderthal skulls and geologic time, the FACT of adaptation, husbandry and mutation, life being found at volcanic vents in the ocean, digit bones in whale fins.. need more? I'll play this evidence game with you all day long. Be sure to offer YOUR evidence for creationism.

All of which have no proof or origin.... as stated, shogun... science does not want yyou to think it takes leaps of faith... but it certainly does...


I am no proponent of the 5000 year old 'new earth' theory... and I certainly believe science finds out details and expands our knowledge of the known universe all the time... but... 1) science does quite often get it wrong, very wrong... 2) Science does not explain the unknown universe or the beginning

I personally am all for teaching science and the scientific method... but as stated, I want it stated to kids/students that this is not to try and go against their beliefs. That this is teaching a scientific theory for academics and for the further understanding of the world around us...

 

[DiamondDave]

Great ape - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This classification has been revised several times in the last few decades.

Some definitions involve chimps... others just the inclusion of now extinct human like species

Would you rather I use a more direct term of hominan?

 

[Sunni Man]

Have you seen a fucking trilobite lately? wanna pretend that there never was such a creature?

Indeed, live just CAN'T happen around volcanic vents, eh?

Found: 37,000! New Extremophile Marine Microbes …free your imagination…

And that proves what? That there has been life on the earth for a long time?

It says Nothing about so called evolution.

 

[Shogun]

Waiting for the evidence of the singularity and the precursor to the 'big bang' then, shogun.... I guess you can't talk about your theories unless you show that evidence... you have just as much faith dealing with those things as you do in a belief in god, it is just that you wish to worship at the altar of science with huge leaps of faith... because science has NEVER got it wrong and science has a proven explanation for everything...


The thing is... I am all for teaching the evolution theory, as I am teaching the big bang theory... but with a stipulation that it should be told to the students that yes, these are only scientific theories and that in no way is it mean to go against their own personal beliefs in terms of religion, etc

EVIDENCE of an expanding universe, you say? Feast your fucking eyes.

Expanding Universe
Expanding Universe

Big Bang, beginning of the Universe
Big Bang, beginning of the Universe
The universe, as we see it today, is expanding from a widely accepted theoretical event in spacetime called the Big Bang that occurred approximately 13.7 billion years ago.

We have observed that galaxy clusters, including our own, have been receding from each other. A common analogy applied to our expanding universe is of a spotted balloon being blown up. As the balloon expands, so to does the distance between the spots. This increased distance is obviously and evidently true when applied to the many galaxy clusters within our universe.

The Expanding Universe
http://cas.sdss.org/dr6/en/astro/universe/universe.asp
For thousands of years, astronomers wrestled with basic questions about the size and age of the universe. Does the universe go on forever, or does it have an edge somewhere? Has it always existed, or did it come to being some time in the past? In 1929, Edwin Hubble, an astronomer at Carnegie Observatories, made a critical discovery that soon led to scientific answers for these questions: he discovered that the universe is expanding.


Hubble Measures the Expanding Universe
Hubble Measures the Expanding Universe
May 25, 1999: The Hubble Space Telescope Key Project Team today announced that it has completed efforts to measure precise distances to far- flung galaxies, an essential ingredient needed to determine the age, size and fate of the universe.

Right: A NASA Hubble Space Telescope (HST) view of the magnificent spiral galaxy NGC 4603, the most distant galaxy in which a special class of pulsating stars called Cepheid variables have been found. Researchers found 36-50 Cepheids and used their observed properties to securely determine the distance to NGC 4603. Observations of distant Cepheids such as those in NGC 4603 also help astronomers to precisely measure the expansion rate of the Universe (more information).

Astronomy Picture of the Day

Explanation: Our Universe is expanding. Distant galaxies appear to recede from us at ever-increasing speeds. What is the rate of expansion? How long has it been expanding? What will be its ultimate fate? Two groups of astronomers are searching vigorously for answers to these fundamental questions using the Hubble Space Telescope (HST). The teams have recently announced conflicting measurements of the Hubble constant, a number which represents the expansion rate of the Universe. Astronomer Wendy Freedman and her collaborators have used pulsating stars called Cepheids to measure the distance to galaxies like the Fornax cluster barred spiral galaxy NGC1365 shown above. The ground based photo (left) shows an inset locating the HST image (right) which Freedman and team have used to identify some 50 Cepheids. Their distance and velocity measurements determine Hubble's constant to be about 80 kilometers per second per megaparsec which means that galaxies one megaparsec (3 million lightyears) distant appear to recede from us at a speed of 80 kilometers per second. Conflicting results indicating a substantially slower expansion rate (smaller Hubble constant) are being reported by astronomer Allan Sandage and collaborators. The value of Hubble's constant was recently the subject of a popular public debate titled "The Scale of the Universe 1996: The Value of Hubble's Constant".
APOD: May 13, 1996 - Hubble's Constant And The Expanding Universe (I)

Astronomy: Exploring the expanding universe
ASTRONOMY - Exploring the Expanding Universe

YOU wanted evidence? Here it is. Now, PLEASE, offer anything that can be said for the evidence of creationism.

 

[Ravi]

This classification has been revised several times in the last few decades.

Some definitions involve chimps... others just the inclusion of now extinct human like species

Would you rather I use a more direct term of hominan?

From Webster's:

Main Entry: Ho·min·i·dae
Pronunciation: h

-

min-

-

d

Function: noun plural
: a family of bipedal mammals of the order Primates comprising recent humans together with extinct ancestral and related forms -- see 1[SIZE=-1]HOMO [/SIZE]1