08-23-2005, 03:17 PM | #641 | |
Advocatus Diaboli
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Reality
Posts: 3,767
|
Quote:
those who prefer intelligent design would like to think we were designed for a purpose (preferable a good one ) ... but this is just as much an individual decision as is my own to just take purpose out of existance itself... it's "bad science" implying such a purpose without proof (or even a guess) at what this purpose is
__________________
Your reality, sir, is lies and balderdash and I'm delighted to say that I have no grasp of it whatsoever. |
|
08-23-2005, 03:17 PM | #642 | |
Advocatus Diaboli
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Reality
Posts: 3,767
|
Quote:
those who prefer intelligent design would like to think we were designed for a purpose (preferable a good one ) ... but this is just as much an individual decision as is my own to just take purpose out of existance itself... it's "bad science" implying such a purpose without proof (or even a guess) at what this purpose is
__________________
Your reality, sir, is lies and balderdash and I'm delighted to say that I have no grasp of it whatsoever. |
|
08-23-2005, 03:17 PM | #643 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
I'd be more than willing to discuss/debate the finer scientific points, but it'd probably make boring reading for most...Suggest new thread?
|
08-23-2005, 03:17 PM | #644 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
I'd be more than willing to discuss/debate the finer scientific points, but it'd probably make boring reading for most...Suggest new thread?
|
08-23-2005, 03:22 PM | #645 |
An enigma in a conundrum
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 6,476
|
Actually since you're talking evolution and how it's taught-whether in Kansas or Oz, it wouldn't necessarily be a new thread. Try keeping it here for now.
__________________
Vizzini: "HE DIDN'T FALL?! INCONCEIVABLE!!" Inigo: "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." |
08-23-2005, 03:22 PM | #646 |
An enigma in a conundrum
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 6,476
|
Actually since you're talking evolution and how it's taught-whether in Kansas or Oz, it wouldn't necessarily be a new thread. Try keeping it here for now.
__________________
Vizzini: "HE DIDN'T FALL?! INCONCEIVABLE!!" Inigo: "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." |
08-23-2005, 03:27 PM | #647 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
I was just trying to give respect to Rian who started the thread to discuss a specific issue, but ok...
|
08-23-2005, 03:27 PM | #648 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
I was just trying to give respect to Rian who started the thread to discuss a specific issue, but ok...
|
08-23-2005, 03:45 PM | #649 |
Quasi Evil
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Maryland, US
Posts: 4,634
|
Heres the problem:
The religious folk dont want to approach this in the same way as any other scientific subject is approached when we dont have all the data or when something new is discovered. They simply want to poke holes in it at all costs from everything Ive seen. You already CAN propose scientific issues/problems/questions/apparent inconsistencies about ANY scientific topic. Thats how it works. This is nothing new. But the anti-evolution folks only focus on evolution. And they ONLY focus on teaching that horrible ungodly theory to our innocent children!! The horror! So the agenda becomes clear. Why not be consistent then and just use the same routes to change as everyone else. Yes you may get some serious lumps at first but if your data and evidence is good youll win in the end. You don’t need trickery or lies or political strong arming to do it. Just good quality reproducible data. Why take over school boards to force teaching "mistakes" of evolution to kiddies? So far we have had: TACTIC I Creationist: Evolution is wrong! We propose Creationism. Scientist: Well Wheres yer evidence? Creationist: Um well there is none. Its just evolution seems so ridiculous to us so IT MUST BE WRONG! Which means it must be god that created everything. Scientist: Sorry youll need evidence to propose a new theory. TACTIC II Creationist: Evolution is wrong! We propose Intelligent Design Scientist: Well wheres yer evidence... Creationist: Well weve found some problems and inconsistencies with evolution. Scientist: Many of those have been debunked when you presented them for creationism. And anyway they dont amount to evidence FOR anything. Do you have anything else? Creationist: Well no... But evolution still seems too ridiculous to us so IT STILL MUST BE WRONG! Which means it must be that a *ahem* unnamed creator made everything... Scientist: Sorry youll need EVIDENCE to propose a new theory. TACTIC III Creationist: Ok Im not here to propose anything just want to teach your kids how evolution is all wrong. Scientist: You know Im beginning to smell a rat here… Why pick solely on evolution? We don’t do this for any other science. We teach what we currently know. We ALSO ALREADY teach inconsistencies and point out what we DON’T know about evolution in the classroom. Science never claimed to have 100% of the answers in this field. So what is it you want to add to this exactly… What REALLY is your agenda here…
__________________
"People's political beliefs don't stem from the factual information they've acquired. Far more the facts people choose to believe are the product of their political beliefs." "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." |
08-23-2005, 03:45 PM | #650 |
Quasi Evil
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Maryland, US
Posts: 4,634
|
Heres the problem:
The religious folk dont want to approach this in the same way as any other scientific subject is approached when we dont have all the data or when something new is discovered. They simply want to poke holes in it at all costs from everything Ive seen. You already CAN propose scientific issues/problems/questions/apparent inconsistencies about ANY scientific topic. Thats how it works. This is nothing new. But the anti-evolution folks only focus on evolution. And they ONLY focus on teaching that horrible ungodly theory to our innocent children!! The horror! So the agenda becomes clear. Why not be consistent then and just use the same routes to change as everyone else. Yes you may get some serious lumps at first but if your data and evidence is good youll win in the end. You don’t need trickery or lies or political strong arming to do it. Just good quality reproducible data. Why take over school boards to force teaching "mistakes" of evolution to kiddies? So far we have had: TACTIC I Creationist: Evolution is wrong! We propose Creationism. Scientist: Well Wheres yer evidence? Creationist: Um well there is none. Its just evolution seems so ridiculous to us so IT MUST BE WRONG! Which means it must be god that created everything. Scientist: Sorry youll need evidence to propose a new theory. TACTIC II Creationist: Evolution is wrong! We propose Intelligent Design Scientist: Well wheres yer evidence... Creationist: Well weve found some problems and inconsistencies with evolution. Scientist: Many of those have been debunked when you presented them for creationism. And anyway they dont amount to evidence FOR anything. Do you have anything else? Creationist: Well no... But evolution still seems too ridiculous to us so IT STILL MUST BE WRONG! Which means it must be that a *ahem* unnamed creator made everything... Scientist: Sorry youll need EVIDENCE to propose a new theory. TACTIC III Creationist: Ok Im not here to propose anything just want to teach your kids how evolution is all wrong. Scientist: You know Im beginning to smell a rat here… Why pick solely on evolution? We don’t do this for any other science. We teach what we currently know. We ALSO ALREADY teach inconsistencies and point out what we DON’T know about evolution in the classroom. Science never claimed to have 100% of the answers in this field. So what is it you want to add to this exactly… What REALLY is your agenda here…
__________________
"People's political beliefs don't stem from the factual information they've acquired. Far more the facts people choose to believe are the product of their political beliefs." "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." |
08-23-2005, 03:49 PM | #651 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Your analysis of creationist thinking is amusing if nothing else. As I previously posted, I am more than willing to discuss the finer scientific points. If, however, you feel I'm just going to poke holes in your theory (and we can't have that), go ahead and try to poke holes in mine
|
08-23-2005, 03:49 PM | #652 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Your analysis of creationist thinking is amusing if nothing else. As I previously posted, I am more than willing to discuss the finer scientific points. If, however, you feel I'm just going to poke holes in your theory (and we can't have that), go ahead and try to poke holes in mine
|
08-23-2005, 03:51 PM | #653 |
Quasi Evil
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Maryland, US
Posts: 4,634
|
Im all for learning the finer "scientific" points of creationism. Theres a thread around called EVIDENCE FOR CREATIONISM or some such. You could have a go at it in there if you like.
__________________
"People's political beliefs don't stem from the factual information they've acquired. Far more the facts people choose to believe are the product of their political beliefs." "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." |
08-23-2005, 03:51 PM | #654 |
Quasi Evil
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Maryland, US
Posts: 4,634
|
Im all for learning the finer "scientific" points of creationism. Theres a thread around called EVIDENCE FOR CREATIONISM or some such. You could have a go at it in there if you like.
__________________
"People's political beliefs don't stem from the factual information they've acquired. Far more the facts people choose to believe are the product of their political beliefs." "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." |
08-23-2005, 03:55 PM | #655 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
This thread, IR?
Just opening up discussion again since this topic came up on the Kansas Debate Thread. Fire away
|
08-23-2005, 03:57 PM | #656 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
*chuckle* I'd prefer a more neutral thread but that's fine too.
|
08-23-2005, 03:57 PM | #657 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
*chuckle* I'd prefer a more neutral thread but that's fine too.
|
08-23-2005, 04:04 PM | #658 |
An enigma in a conundrum
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 6,476
|
yep, I could merge the two if you think that would help or if you prefer to keep them separate thats ok too.
__________________
Vizzini: "HE DIDN'T FALL?! INCONCEIVABLE!!" Inigo: "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." |
08-23-2005, 04:04 PM | #659 |
An enigma in a conundrum
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 6,476
|
I see you found the other thread. Now we decide whether to merge or not.
__________________
Vizzini: "HE DIDN'T FALL?! INCONCEIVABLE!!" Inigo: "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." |
08-23-2005, 04:04 PM | #660 |
An enigma in a conundrum
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 6,476
|
I see you found the other thread. Now we decide whether to merge or not.
__________________
Vizzini: "HE DIDN'T FALL?! INCONCEIVABLE!!" Inigo: "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Evidence for Evolution | jerseydevil | General Messages | 599 | 05-18-2008 02:43 PM |
How to teach evolution & Evidence for Creationism II | Nurvingiel | General Messages | 528 | 08-05-2006 03:50 AM |
Evidence for Creationism and Against Evolution | Rían | General Messages | 1149 | 08-16-2004 06:07 PM |