Should scientists demand evolution is taught in churches?

[SiderealExalt]

From the U.S. National Academy of Sciences.

Some scientific explanations are so well established that no new evidence is likely to alter them. The explanation becomes a scientific theory. In everyday language a theory means a hunch or speculation. Not so in science. In science, the word theory refers to a comprehensive explanation of an important feature of nature that is supported by many facts gathered over time. Theories also allow scientists to make predictions about as yet unobserved phenomena...

 

[Holy Roller]

You guys (Atheists) are confusing ID with Creationism. Why? That's almost as bad as Atheists putting pictures of Darwin all over their discussion forums!

There are some facts of evolution that can never really be proven. Protein evolution, for one. Abiogenesis a second.

ID seeks to bridge this gap between the known and the unknown. Because of this--the bridge between knowing that a certain set of proteins exist and not knowing how the proteins originated--ID has nothing in common with Creationism whatsoever.

If an Atheist wishes to attempt the ridiculous and claim the two are related somehow, don't be the least bit surprised if I call you on it; don't come back complaining I'm insulting you. I am not insulting you; I'm merely pointing out certain deficiencies with your posting, that's all...

 

[SiderealExalt]

You guys (Atheists) are confusing ID with Creationism. Why? That's almost as bad as Atheists putting pictures of Darwin all over their discussion forums!

ID=Creationists trying to use a different term as part of the backdoor campaign to get their religious beliefs in school science classes.

There are some facts of evolution that can never really be proven. Protein evolution, for one. Abiogenesis a second.

A. You have yet to provide evidence for.B. Abiogenesis is a separate subject from evolutionary theory. Gee, try to at least make this difficult.

 

[BlackSabb]

ID=Creationists trying to use a different term as part of the backdoor campaign to get their religious beliefs in school science classes.



A. You have yet to provide evidence for.B. Abiogenesis is a separate subject from evolutionary theory. Gee, try to at least make this difficult.

Why can't you put one post in without resorting to snide sarcasm, insults, putdowns etc? Every one of your posts is like this.


Statements like:

"Gee, why don't you make this hard?"

"You should find out what a scientific theory is"

"Go and learn and find out the difference"


Etc, etc, etc. Do you feel important and powerful because you can insult and put down everybody who disagrees with you? Is this the only method of communication you are capable of? Do you feel good about yourself using sarcasm and snide remarks? I know you think that it makes you look like a learned intellectual to be posting like this. But I think you will find that most around here will simply see your style of posting as akin to a 5 yr old child, stomping its feet on the ground and throwing a tantrum and saying:

"No no no, you go and learn the difference, you're wrong, why don't you make it hard......?"

Please be civil in your conversations around here towards your fellow posters or don't post at all.

 

[SiderealExalt]

Why can't you put one post in without resorting to snide sarcasm, insults, putdowns etc? Every one of your posts is like this.


Statements like:

"Gee, why don't you make this hard?"

"You should find out what a scientific theory is"

"Go and learn and find out the difference"


Etc, etc, etc. Do you feel important and powerful because you can insult and put down everybody who disagrees with you? Is this the only method of communication you are capable of? Do you feel good about yourself using sarcasm and snide remarks? I know you think that it makes you look like a learned intellectual to be posting like this. But I think you will find that most around here will simply see your style of posting as akin to a 5 yr old child, stomping its feet on the ground and throwing a tantrum and saying:

"No no no, you go and learn the difference, you're wrong, why don't you make it hard......?"

Please be civil in your conversations around here towards your fellow posters or don't post at all.

So are you complaining just because you are wrong. Or because you are wrong AND I have sarcasm in my posts.

 

[CreedIsChrist]

except evolution has evidence and ID doesn't. ID and evolution are incompatible, what does ID have to say most of the time? "evolution is impossible!"
that's it.
how can something that bases itself on tearing down science be called science, yet never shows how its the answer?

Like evolutions great evidence of transitional fossils or the "big bang"? lol

Theres many things evolution cannot answer. And for public schools to think its the only answer is a disservice to the children who have to be told that we came from monkeys that have no self reason or will and that it all came from nothing "somehow".

 

[SiderealExalt]

Like evolutions great evidence of transitional fossils or the "big bang"? lol

Good thing A. we have a lot of transitional fossils and B. evolutionary theory doesn't hinge solely on them.

C. Evolution has nothing to do with the "Big Bang" Theory. And if you knew anything about spacetime you'd know just bad of a statement you just made.

Theres many things evolution cannot answer

Good thing A. Science is a self correcting medium and B. You should try providing examples if you want people to take you seriously.

And for public schools to think its the only answer is a disservice to the children who have to be told that we came from monkeys that have no self reason or will and that it all came from nothing "somehow".

Good thing science doesn't say that "it all came from nothing "somehow." Nor does evolutionary biologists say we came from monkeys.

But we all appreciate your demonstration of ignorance about scientific subjects. It's obvious you've spent decades of rigorous study and scientific experiments to give us an plausible scientific alternative to the diversity of life other than evolution and that you've demonstrated that reading an ancient book of myths has given us accurate answers about life on our planet. /sarcasm.

 

[WatersMoon110]

While I don't think that church is the best place to teach Biology, I am all for more Scientists in churches. In fact, in the UU Church we visited in Columbus, I heard one of my favorite quotes of all time from a Scientist (who was presenting a service about ID and Real Science):

"They [ID] use facts like a drunk uses a light post; for support not illumination."

The very great thing about Science is they have nothing to lose for being wrong. In fact, in that same service, it was said: "You can make a very good living as a Scientist by making interesting mistakes!"

If there was more evidence to prove ID than there was evidence to prove evolution, Scientists would be the first to tell us about it!

 

[LittleNipper]

Like evolutions great evidence of transitional fossils or the "big bang"? lol

Theres many things evolution cannot answer. And for public schools to think its the only answer is a disservice to the children who have to be told that we came from monkeys that have no self reason or will and that it all came from nothing "somehow".

Except there is not one fossil showing a transition between single celled organisms and multi-celled ones. Bangs scatter things in a sphere. So why is the universe seemingly flat (possibly even folded on itself)?

 

[stan1980]

Did I not clearly say to everyone here that I don't believe that evolution nor creationism should be taught? Did i not say that both are unproven and merely theories only?

There is plenty of evidence for evolution though, you just wont accept it. It would be bordering on perverse to ignore it and not pass it on to our children.

The evidence is virtually indisputable. Science doesn't always get it right though, and I'm sure you'd love to see evolution proved wrong, while this will likely never happen, if you try and hold science back we will find it harder to improve and build on what we already know. That's the beauty of science, it doesn't mind changing it's mind, unlike certain people who buy into all the stuff they read in the bible.

I think the real reason people don't want evolution taught, is that they know the theory and the evidence crushes creationism, so if we teach it to our kids what chance have we got of them believing our outdated world views. I'd rather they had the facts at hand, if they want to read the bible too, that is fine, holding information back though is, as I said before, perverse.

 

[LittleNipper]

There is plenty of evidence for evolution though, you just wont accept it. It would be bordering on perverse to ignore it and not pass it on to our children.

The evidence is virtually indisputable. Science doesn't always get it right though, and I'm sure you'd love to see evolution proved wrong, while this will likely never happen, if you try and hold science back we will find it harder to improve and build on what we already know. That's the beauty of science, it doesn't mind changing it's mind, unlike certain people who buy into all the stuff they read in the bible.

I think the real reason people don't want evolution taught, is that they know the theory and the evidence crushes creationism, so if we teach it to our kids what chance have we got of them believing our outdated world views. I'd rather they had the facts at hand, if they want to read the bible too, that is fine, holding information back though is, as I said before, perverse.

I would want to build a straight tower and not one that will fall over ---- eventually.

 

[stan1980]

I would want to build a straight tower and not one that will fall over ---- eventually.

Using your analogy, if the tower represents knowledge, I'd say in science, the tower clearly isn't fully built yet, but the foundations are in the right place, and while slight alterations might be needed along the way, it is a pretty sturdy piece.

Your tower, however, we were lead to believe is built and complete, yet it is crumbling down around your eyes, the worst thing is you can't even see it from the inside, yet it is obvious to the onlooker.

 

[LittleNipper]

Using your analogy, if the tower represents knowledge, I'd say in science, the tower clearly isn't fully built yet, but the foundations are in the right place, and while slight alterations might be needed along the way, it is a pretty sturdy piece.

Your tower, however, we were lead to believe is built and complete, yet it is crumbling down around your eyes, the worst thing is you can't even see it from the inside, yet it is obvious to the onlooker.

I do not believe that I fully understand how GOD did anything HE did. I do fully believe HE did it though. Evolutionists leave out GOD. They ignore biblical implications. They are sold on the idea that one needs only look and examine for one's self and he or she will see the truth for themselves. If this were the case GOD would not have had the Bible written.

 

[Paulos23]

I do not believe that I fully understand how GOD did anything HE did. I do fully believe HE did it though. Evolutionists leave out GOD. They ignore biblical implications. They are sold on the idea that one needs only look and examine for one's self and he or she will see the truth for themselves. If this were the case GOD would not have had the Bible written.

Is there any good scientific reason to include God or the Bible (or any religious books for that matter) in scientific study? Last time I looked the Bible was not a science book but a collection of stories with morals, which may or may not be based off of real events.

 

[wanderingone]

What the Atheist cannot do is allege that ID and evolution theory are somehow incompatible.

One can "allege" whatever they want regardless of their belief system, allege is just that, a claim, an opinion, something not yet proven.

You can allege that ID is equal to evolution in a science class but I won't be supporting the introduction of it into my school district.

Scientists obviously should not be dictating what churches believe and theories based on religious belief have no place in a public school classroom.

 

[jcook922]

One can "allege" whatever they want regardless of their belief system, allege is just that, a claim, an opinion, something not yet proven.

You can allege that ID is equal to evolution in a science class but I won't be supporting the introduction of it into my school district.

Scientists obviously should not be dictating what churches believe and theories based on religious belief have no place in a public school classroom.

Quoted for truth/emphasis.

 

[MarcusHill]

I do not believe that I fully understand how GOD did anything HE did. I do fully believe HE did it though. Evolutionists leave out GOD. They ignore biblical implications. They are sold on the idea that one needs only look and examine for one's self and he or she will see the truth for themselves. If this were the case GOD would not have had the Bible written.

Finally, you've said something that makes perfect logical sense in your last sentence there. It is, in fact, the case that with sufficient examination one can see the truth, and the Bible was written by men with no input or direction from any supernatural entity; the logical implication statement you made is therefore valid.

 

[LittleNipper]

Is there any good scientific reason to include God or the Bible (or any religious books for that matter) in scientific study? Last time I looked the Bible was not a science book but a collection of stories with morals, which may or may not be based off of real events.

Well, the Bible is also history book. History is not pretend. The Bible certainly alludes to future events that point to a return to GOD's original design. Luke 3:5 Now, if the earth will one day will become such a place and GOD considers that good, why would anyone imagine that the ORIGINALLY CREATED earth was any less ------------- unless evolutionists & uniformitarians teach something contrary.

 

[cantata]

BlackSabb, do you also advocate the abolition of the teaching of atomic theory or gravitational theory in schools?

 

[Paulos23]

Well, the Bible is also history book.

Since when is history science? And depending on what part of the Bible you are talking about, where is the correlating evidence or documentation?

History is not pretend.

No, but it does get exaggerated.

The Bible certainly alludes to future events that point to a return to GOD's original design. Luke 3:5

What history book does that???? Guess the Bible isn't a history book if you are claiming that.

Now, if the earth will one day will become such a place and GOD considers that good, why would anyone imagine that the ORIGINALLY CREATED earth was any less ------------- unless evolutionists & uniformitarians teach something contrary.

I don't see how teaching evolution will have any effect of God's design. For that matter, there is no clear description of God's design. How do you know you teaching evolution is not part of it?

You really need to get your story straight here Nip, the Bible can't both be a history book or tell the future. And as a history book, it is interesting that there is not that much evidence supporting it's telling of history.