Would you really teach "creation science"?

[shernren]

Quite an interesting hypothesis. What "crowd" were they following?

The already Christian European nations.

Our nation never desired to enshrine Christianity but to extol its virtues. If our nations fathers based their decisions upon their faith then it should be taught in school. Our kids should learn what it was that made our country great and its basis on Christianity was a key component of it.

All fine and well. You must be prepared, though, when Chinese people ask you to teach that Confucianism made China great and Christian European plans caused it to crumble. Or when Muslims ask you to teach that Islam made the great Mohammedan empires great. Your choice.

... Back to the OP. How would you teach creation science (or ID as a more politically correct name) in schools? How would you present it as a theory that makes and verifies predictions, instead of a faction that tries to nullify other factions' theories and predictions without having anything better of its own?

 

[The Lady Kate]

I hope these aren't rhetorical too?!?[/color][/font]

1. Who says anything about the government converting people, it's the church that should do the converting.

On its own, or with the authority of the US government to back it up?

2. See above.

Ditto.

3. Nothing, they can accept Christianity or reject it, it's up to them.

Not much point in calling this a Christian nation then...

 

[vossler]

The already Christian European nations.

Well, it can be disputed as to how Christian these nations were. Remember, these folks left Europe to escape religious persecution.

All fine and well. You must be prepared, though, when Chinese people ask you to teach that Confucianism made China great and Christian European plans caused it to crumble. Or when Muslims ask you to teach that Islam made the great Mohammedan empires great. Your choice.

Of course Chinese people can teach Confucianism in China or Muslims all about Islam in Iran. I have no problem with that.

... Back to the OP. How would you teach creation science (or ID as a more politically correct name) in schools? How would you present it as a theory that makes and verifies predictions, instead of a faction that tries to nullify other factions' theories and predictions without having anything better of its own?

Present the known facts as facts and the theories as theories and let the kids decide. It wouldn't be easy because the teacher will have a theory that he/she already believes to be superior, but it can be done. If the rules are set in the beginning it wouldn't be all that difficult to enforce. Believe me it doesn't take much to get the ACLU involved.

 

[vossler]

On its own, or with the authority of the US government to back it up?

On its own, without any hinderances from the government.

Not much point in calling this a Christian nation then...

I don't know why you say that? Christianity is based on a freedom of choice. We can be Christian without efforcing compliance, if we can't then there's no sense in calling ourselves Christians.

 

[shernren]

Present the known facts as facts and the theories as theories and let the kids decide. It wouldn't be easy because the teacher will have a theory that he/she already believes to be superior, but it can be done. If the rules are set in the beginning it wouldn't be all that difficult to enforce. Believe me it doesn't take much to get the ACLU involved.

Okay. But how would you present ID theory scientifically in a science class? What evidence would you present to support it and how? That's what I'm asking for. I know you're not scientifically inclined so you can pass on this. That's the whole problem, though. To someone who doesn't look into the nitty gritty of it it seems perfectly fine and magnanimous to teach "both sides of the coin". But once you start going into details and actually trying to teach it you'll find that the ID side of the coin is surprisingly small ....

 

[The Lady Kate]

On its own, without any hinderances from the government.

Or without any preferential treatment from the government...

I don't know why you say that? Christianity is based on a freedom of choice. We can be Christian without efforcing compliance, if we can't then there's no sense in calling ourselves Christians.

So our citizens are free to be Christians...or not.
Free to be Muslims... or not.
Free to be Buddhists... or not.
Free to be Atheists... or not.
Free to be Aztec Sun-Worshippers... or not.

What then is the point of calling this a "Christian Nation"? Why not be more accurate and call this a "Free Nation"?

But this is getting us off-topic... what say we return to the issue of Creation Science?

 

[vossler]

Okay. But how would you present ID theory scientifically in a science class? What evidence would you present to support it and how? That's what I'm asking for. I know you're not scientifically inclined so you can pass on this. That's the whole problem, though. To someone who doesn't look into the nitty gritty of it it seems perfectly fine and magnanimous to teach "both sides of the coin". But once you start going into details and actually trying to teach it you'll find that the ID side of the coin is surprisingly small ....

There's a lot of scientific evidence to support it, now I'll admit it doesn't come close to the volumes of evidence for evolution, but it does exist. Don't ask me for specifics because science isn't my thing, thankfully we have AiG, ICR and other organizations where it is their thing. Now if what they present to the class isn't strong enough or even a pack of lies, as they've been accused of promoting, then anyone with a brain who is presented with the 'truth' of evolution will see right through it, wouldn't they? You would think evolutionists with their strong evidence, facts and so called truths would be more than willing to let the chips fall where they may and finally put Creationism to the grave.

Isn't it interesting that whenever given the opportunity to present both sides, it is the evolutionists that protests.

 

[The Lady Kate]

There's a lot of scientific evidence to support it, now I'll admit it doesn't come close to the volumes of evidence for evolution, but it does exist.

Such as...?

Don't ask me for specifics because science isn't my thing, thankfully we have AiG, ICR and other organizations where it is their thing.

Their thing is Creationism, not ID.

Now if what they present to the class isn't strong enough or even a pack of lies, as they've been accused of promoting, then anyone with a brain who is presented with the 'truth' of evolution will see right through it, wouldn't they?

While we're at it, let's teach that 2+2=5, that George Washington fought on the side of the Biritish, and that the Capital of the USA is Chicago.

Anyone with a brain will see right through it, wouldn't they?

You would think evolutionists with their strong evidence, facts and so called truths would be more than willing to let the chips fall where they may and finally put Creationism to the grave.

Creationism's been in the scientific grave for over 200 years. Why do you think Creationists have moved their battles over into the political arena? A place where any idea can be dug up, brished off, and paraded out in a new suit...

Isn't it interesting that whenever given the opportunity to present both sides, it is the evolutionists that protests.

Flat-Earth, Holocaust denial, Invisible Pixies pushing everything down (Take that, gravity!)... how much lunacy must our educational system endure in the name of "fairness"?

 

[vossler]

Such as...?

Their thing is Creationism, not ID.

I'm sorry, it didn't even register with me that shrenren used the term Intelligent Design, I was thinking Creationism all along.

While we're at it, let's teach that 2+2=5, that George Washington fought on the side of the Biritish, and that the Capital of the USA is Chicago.

Anyone with a brain will see right through it, wouldn't they?

I'm guessing this is one of those rhetorical questions again???

Creationism's been in the scientific grave for over 200 years. Why do you think Creationists have moved their battles over into the political arena? A place where any idea can be dug up, brished off, and paraded out in a new suit...

Well I think you should look around some, there are quite a few creationists who are scientists. That might be the reason why that grave is empty.

Flat-Earth, Holocaust denial, Invisible Pixies pushing everything down (Take that, gravity!)... how much lunacy must our educational system endure in the name of "fairness"?

Hey, if it's as dead as you say it is, it won't take much to finally put a fork in it, now would it? Just think you'll finally pull that thorn out and move on to bigger and better things.

C'mon what are evolutionists afraid of?

 

[The Lady Kate]

I'm sorry, it didn't even register with me that shrenren used the term Intelligent Design, I was thinking Creationism all along.

Of course you were... that's the general idea. Two terms describing the same thing.

I'm guessing this is one of those rhetorical questions again???

Try answering it and find out.

Well I think you should look around some, there are quite a few creationists who are scientists. That might be the reason why that grave is empty.

The key word being "few." Just as there are a few historians who claim the Holocaust never happened. There's a reason why the grave is empty, but it's not necessarily a good one.

Hey, if it's as dead as you say it is, it won't take much to finally put a fork in it, now would it? Just think you'll finally pull that thorn out and move on to bigger and better things.

C'mon what are evolutionists afraid of?

Whining Creationists and other religious fundamentalists appealing to politicians, turning truth into a popularity contest.

Where does it stop?

 

[vossler]

Try answering it and find out.

I'm sorry but I'm not into playing games.

The key word being "few." Just as there are a few historians who claim the Holocaust never happened. There's a reason why the grave is empty, but it's not necessarily a good one.

Well if something were truly dead, it wouldn't get up. Truth has a way of doing that you know. Remember Jesus rose from the dead too.

Whining Creationists and other religious fundamentalists appealing to politicians, turning truth into a popularity contest.

Where does it stop?

Just what I thought, the evidence isn't quite as strong as you all make it out to be. Isn't it interesting how folks here will assertions that anyone with a brain could see how evolution is a fact and the truth, yet this fact or 'truth' is afraid of the light.

 

[The Lady Kate]

I'm sorry but I'm not into playing games.

Then you're probably in the wrong place.

Well if something were truly dead, it wouldn't get up. Truth has a way of doing that you know. Remember Jesus rose from the dead too.

YEC isn't Jesus, so your joke falls flat.

Just what I thought, the evidence isn't quite as strong as you all make it out to be. Isn't it interesting how folks here will assertions that anyone with a brain could see how evolution is a fact and the truth, yet this fact or 'truth' is afraid of the light.

What are you talking about? Creationism is what has no evidence going for it, but cry loud enough, and the politicians (who'll trade truth for votes every day of the week, and twice on Sunday) will pander to it.

Evidence, please? Anything you have would be impressive...