Should We Teach Creation As Science In Public Schools?

[Wyatt earp]

dont tell him that,,,he still thinks it

but what I'm asking for is this common ancestor and how it spawned all life as we know it

I think that's two different questions, isn't it? Lucy is our ancestor. She didn't make little green apples, though. I'm confused.

there is no proof lucy is anything other than dead bones found in the ground

Lucy was just a small ape.

She walked upright, which apes don't, and we found 40% of her bones, which is a whole lot. The bigger brain that gives us the double sapiens in our name didn't come until later. But she was on her hind legs. That's big.

Better read up on it. The shape and angle of the pelvic bones would have prevented walking upright constantly. She also would have had the ape "sway" when she did walk upright.

Just a small ape evolutionists cling to in their quest to sell evolution.

And monkeys are strong as hell, they can RIP your face off .

We are weak

 

[alang1216]

We are finding he created the Higgs field, CMB, Planck's constant, basic gases, solar wind, and more.

You have that backwards. We've found these things and since there is a gap in our understanding of how or when they came to be, you attribute them to a creator, a 'he'.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Poor James
They no longer teach that we evolved straight from chimps.

dont tell him that,,,he still thinks it

but what I'm asking for is this common ancestor and how it spawned all life as we know it

I think that's two different questions, isn't it? Lucy is our ancestor. She didn't make little green apples, though. I'm confused.

there is no proof lucy is anything other than dead bones found in the ground

Lucy was just a small ape.

She walked upright, which apes don't, and we found 40% of her bones, which is a whole lot. The bigger brain that gives us the double sapiens in our name didn't come until later. But she was on her hind legs. That's big.

But she had sex with the biggest ones?

 

[Wyatt earp]

We are finding he created the Higgs field, CMB, Planck's constant, basic gases, solar wind, and more.

You have that backwards. We've found these things and since there is a gap in our understanding of how or when they came to be, you attribute them to a creator, a 'he'.

God is a she

 

[OldLady]

dont tell him that,,,he still thinks it

but what I'm asking for is this common ancestor and how it spawned all life as we know it

I think that's two different questions, isn't it? Lucy is our ancestor. She didn't make little green apples, though. I'm confused.

there is no proof lucy is anything other than dead bones found in the ground

Lucy was just a small ape.

She walked upright, which apes don't, and we found 40% of her bones, which is a whole lot. The bigger brain that gives us the double sapiens in our name didn't come until later. But she was on her hind legs. That's big.

dead bones dont walk,,,the rest is just opinion


and didnt you say earlier this was no longer the view we came from primates???

We popped up as one of many hominid types and because our brains grew we figured out how to survive.
It is not opinion that the pelvis and spine are aligned in such a way in Lucy that we can definitely say she walked upright. Scientists don't make "opinions" about that. They compare those bones to others that walk upright and creatures that don't.
I sure don't profess to be an expert on any of this stuff, but I've read enough to know that Lucy wasn't just an ape.

 

[sparky]

If you want your kid to 'get religion' take him/her to church....~S~

 

[progressive hunter]

I think that's two different questions, isn't it? Lucy is our ancestor. She didn't make little green apples, though. I'm confused.

there is no proof lucy is anything other than dead bones found in the ground

Lucy was just a small ape.

She walked upright, which apes don't, and we found 40% of her bones, which is a whole lot. The bigger brain that gives us the double sapiens in our name didn't come until later. But she was on her hind legs. That's big.

dead bones dont walk,,,the rest is just opinion


and didnt you say earlier this was no longer the view we came from primates???

We popped up as one of many hominid types and because our brains grew we figured out how to survive.
It is not opinion that the pelvis and spine are aligned in such a way in Lucy that we can definitely say she walked upright. Scientists don't make "opinions" about that. They compare those bones to others that walk upright and creatures that don't.
I sure don't profess to be an expert on any of this stuff, but I've read enough to know that Lucy wasn't just an ape.

popped up sounds like a magical thing,,,and what did we pop up from???

did we pop up as a baby??? how does a baby feed itself??? it cant even walk let alone gather food

 

[Wyatt earp]

I think that's two different questions, isn't it? Lucy is our ancestor. She didn't make little green apples, though. I'm confused.

there is no proof lucy is anything other than dead bones found in the ground

Lucy was just a small ape.

She walked upright, which apes don't, and we found 40% of her bones, which is a whole lot. The bigger brain that gives us the double sapiens in our name didn't come until later. But she was on her hind legs. That's big.

dead bones dont walk,,,the rest is just opinion


and didnt you say earlier this was no longer the view we came from primates???

We popped up as one of many hominid types and because our brains grew we figured out how to survive.
It is not opinion that the pelvis and spine are aligned in such a way in Lucy that we can definitely say she walked upright. Scientists don't make "opinions" about that. They compare those bones to others that walk upright and creatures that don't.
I sure don't profess to be an expert on any of this stuff, but I've read enough to know that Lucy wasn't just an ape.

You really think Lucy was the pinnacle?

Nah

 

[Wyatt earp]

It was all about love.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

I think that's two different questions, isn't it? Lucy is our ancestor. She didn't make little green apples, though. I'm confused.

there is no proof lucy is anything other than dead bones found in the ground

Lucy was just a small ape.

She walked upright, which apes don't, and we found 40% of her bones, which is a whole lot. The bigger brain that gives us the double sapiens in our name didn't come until later. But she was on her hind legs. That's big.

dead bones dont walk,,,the rest is just opinion


and didnt you say earlier this was no longer the view we came from primates???

We popped up as one of many hominid types and because our brains grew we figured out how to survive.
It is not opinion that the pelvis and spine are aligned in such a way in Lucy that we can definitely say she walked upright. Scientists don't make "opinions" about that. They compare those bones to others that walk upright and creatures that don't.
I sure don't profess to be an expert on any of this stuff, but I've read enough to know that Lucy wasn't just an ape.

Real scientists say she was just an ape too. Keep clinging to your myth if you wish. Makes no difference to me at all.

 

[alang1216]

just admit you cant,,,its easier since we all know it doesnt exist

All?? Who is this 'all'? Certainly not me or a sizeable minority of the country. Not surprisingly, at least to me, belief in creationism decreases as education level increases.

as always you revert to creation as a defense,,,
if you know it exist then why are you keeping it a secret??
dude you still think we came from chimps.apes or some other form of life


you are more than welcome to believe in any religion you want but dont tell us its a fact without proof.

As I recall, you don't believe in evolution and claim you're not a creationist. So what exactly do you believe?

as of yet I dont have anything to believe in since neither has given me anything but opinion,
but creation at least admits its based on faith because its a religion


are you going to show me what this common ancestor looked like and explain how it spawned all life as we know it or not???

Why would I show you our common ancestor? You'll just say it is a pile of dead bones. To a scientist those bones are a book filled with information, to you they are just bones because you can't read what they say. You're a science illiterate and won't admit it.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

just admit you cant,,,its easier since we all know it doesnt exist

All?? Who is this 'all'? Certainly not me or a sizeable minority of the country. Not surprisingly, at least to me, belief in creationism decreases as education level increases.

as always you revert to creation as a defense,,,
if you know it exist then why are you keeping it a secret??
dude you still think we came from chimps.apes or some other form of life


you are more than welcome to believe in any religion you want but dont tell us its a fact without proof.

As I recall, you don't believe in evolution and claim you're not a creationist. So what exactly do you believe?

as of yet I dont have anything to believe in since neither has given me anything but opinion,
but creation at least admits its based on faith because its a religion


are you going to show me what this common ancestor looked like and explain how it spawned all life as we know it or not???

Why would I show you our common ancestor? You'll just say it is a pile of dead bones. To a scientist those bones are a book filled with information, to you they are just bones because you can't read what they say. You're a science illiterate and won't admit it.

Just knock it off if you could you would

 

[Wyatt earp]

I think that's two different questions, isn't it? Lucy is our ancestor. She didn't make little green apples, though. I'm confused.

there is no proof lucy is anything other than dead bones found in the ground

Lucy was just a small ape.

She walked upright, which apes don't, and we found 40% of her bones, which is a whole lot. The bigger brain that gives us the double sapiens in our name didn't come until later. But she was on her hind legs. That's big.

dead bones dont walk,,,the rest is just opinion


and didnt you say earlier this was no longer the view we came from primates???

We popped up as one of many hominid types and because our brains grew we figured out how to survive.
It is not opinion that the pelvis and spine are aligned in such a way in Lucy that we can definitely say she walked upright. Scientists don't make "opinions" about that. They compare those bones to others that walk upright and creatures that don't.
I sure don't profess to be an expert on any of this stuff, but I've read enough to know that Lucy wasn't just an ape.[/QUOTE
So Lucy was created?

 

[MisterBeale]

Poor James
They no longer teach that we evolved straight from chimps.

dont tell him that,,,he still thinks it

but what I'm asking for is this common ancestor and how it spawned all life as we know it

I think that's two different questions, isn't it? Lucy is our ancestor. She didn't make little green apples, though. I'm confused.

there is no proof lucy is anything other than dead bones found in the ground

Lucy was just a small ape.

She walked upright, which apes don't, and we found 40% of her bones, which is a whole lot. The bigger brain that gives us the double sapiens in our name didn't come until later. But she was on her hind legs. That's big.

Human Family Tree

 

[Wyatt earp]

there is no proof lucy is anything other than dead bones found in the ground

Lucy was just a small ape.

She walked upright, which apes don't, and we found 40% of her bones, which is a whole lot. The bigger brain that gives us the double sapiens in our name didn't come until later. But she was on her hind legs. That's big.

dead bones dont walk,,,the rest is just opinion


and didnt you say earlier this was no longer the view we came from primates???

We popped up as one of many hominid types and because our brains grew we figured out how to survive.
It is not opinion that the pelvis and spine are aligned in such a way in Lucy that we can definitely say she walked upright. Scientists don't make "opinions" about that. They compare those bones to others that walk upright and creatures that don't.
I sure don't profess to be an expert on any of this stuff, but I've read enough to know that Lucy wasn't just an ape.[/QUOTE
So Lucy was created?

So now you admit lucy was created?

 

[MisterBeale]

Lucy is in the middle of the Australopithecus group.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

dont tell him that,,,he still thinks it

but what I'm asking for is this common ancestor and how it spawned all life as we know it

I think that's two different questions, isn't it? Lucy is our ancestor. She didn't make little green apples, though. I'm confused.

there is no proof lucy is anything other than dead bones found in the ground

Lucy was just a small ape.

She walked upright, which apes don't, and we found 40% of her bones, which is a whole lot. The bigger brain that gives us the double sapiens in our name didn't come until later. But she was on her hind legs. That's big.

Human Family Tree

Nice theory...and it is you know.

 

[OldLady]

dont tell him that,,,he still thinks it

but what I'm asking for is this common ancestor and how it spawned all life as we know it

I think that's two different questions, isn't it? Lucy is our ancestor. She didn't make little green apples, though. I'm confused.

there is no proof lucy is anything other than dead bones found in the ground

Lucy was just a small ape.

She walked upright, which apes don't, and we found 40% of her bones, which is a whole lot. The bigger brain that gives us the double sapiens in our name didn't come until later. But she was on her hind legs. That's big.

Better read up on it. The shape and angle of the pelvic bones would have prevented walking upright constantly. She also would have had the ape "sway" when she did walk upright.

Just a small ape evolutionists cling to in their quest to sell evolution.

I did read up on it. You obviously read articles refuting the "find" because you don't want to believe that evolution happened.

 

[Votto]

Creation science is backed by the scientific method, so it should be taught in schools. Part of the problem is science today only accepts what is natural in the physical world. It is based on the philosophy of empiricism, but today's science does not follow it nor is it backed by the scientific method. What today's science of evolution is backed by is consensus and circumstantial forensic evidence. Why only evolution is taught in schools is because today's science does not allow for a supernatural creator to be involved in the "creation" of the universe, Earth, and everything in it. This is not science when evidence can be provided for the supernatural in creation through the Bible. It is part of Genesis and how God created the natural world. The assumption that there was no supernatural occurrence during the beginning is unscientific. One of the most basic arguments for a creator is the universe began to exist, not an eternal universe, and we have Kalam's Cosmological argument.

Furthermore, we are here -- the universe and everything in it exists! Now, if evolution and its big bang could explain in detail of how the electromagnetic spectrum, the Higgs field, the cosmic microwave background, and how amino acids formed into proteins in outer space from nothing or invisible quantum particles, then they would have a better explanation and argument with big bang. We need to have the theory fit the evidence instead of the evidence made to fit the theory. Science should not just be based on empiricism, but also on a priori reasoning in addition to the scientific a posteriori reasoning. This is all part of epistemology. We need to use facts, reasoning, and historical truths in science since not everything can be proven by scientific method.

I've read Dr. John Morris' explanation for a creator -- Should the Public Schools Teach Creation? -- and today we have a more updated version from Lee Strobel -- Strong case, but flawed by compromise (Review of Lee Strobel, Case for Creator) - creation.com. creation.com gives a brief overview without reading his book. Sorry, I haven't read his book, but have watched the video below.

From my vantage point as a Christian, we have a immaterial God creating a material world, but all science is interested in is a material universe.

Granted, science is also interested in other dimensions, dimensions that are apart of this material existence but how do we study them? Interestingly, scientists say that there are other dimensions, as if they are certain of it, that is foreign to our thought process, but how could we ever know or study them?

I think what concerns me most is a lack of teaching kids morals and ethics. Teaching people knowledge empowers them, so the question begs, do we want to empower amoral people?

 

[alang1216]

We are finding he created the Higgs field, CMB, Planck's constant, basic gases, solar wind, and more.

You have that backwards. We've found these things and since there is a gap in our understanding of how or when they came to be, you attribute them to a creator, a 'he'.

God is a she

So 'She' and Mary had a baby? Truly a miracle. She isn't a lesbian is she?