Creation School. Do we need one?

[Truly1999]

I don't need any church telling me that I should attend their Creation School in order to be able to stand up against Evolutionism. Yet, this has happened. Failure to attend implies that you are on the side of the enemy. I don't need any pastor or scientist telling me what I should or should not say, or how I should formulate my argument.

If some Christians want to know more, then the Church should be able to draw on its scientist members and theologians to provide some answers. But the idea that everyone must learn and rehearse the arguments for Creationism and against Evolutionism as part of their missionary/outreach work amongst their school friends, university friends, or work colleagues is nuts!

However, am I underestimating the assault on Creationism from atheists who are hell-bent on undermining the Christian faith? Perhaps we need a Creation School? I don't know. What do you think?

 

[florida2]

I don't need any church telling me that I should attend their Creation School in order to be able to stand up against Evolutionism. Yet, this has happened. Failure to attend implies that you are on the side of the enemy. I don't need any pastor or scientist telling me what I should or should not say, or how I should formulate my argument.

If some Christians want to know more, then the Church should be able to draw on its scientist members and theologians to provide some answers. But the idea that everyone must learn and rehearse the arguments for Creationism and against Evolutionism as part of their missionary/outreach work amongst their school friends, university friends, or work colleagues is nuts!

However, am I underestimating the assault on Creationism from atheists who are hell-bent on undermining the Christian faith? Perhaps we need a Creation School? I don't know. What do you think?

Creationsm =/= Christianity.

The majority of Christians worldwide accept evolution.

 

[Loudmouth]

I don't need any church telling me that I should attend their Creation School in order to be able to stand up against Evolutionism.

You should ask them if they have a Geocentrism class that can train you to stand up to Heliocentrism.

However, am I underestimating the assault on Creationism from atheists who are hell-bent on undermining the Christian faith? Perhaps we need a Creation School? I don't know. What do you think?

If I were an atheist hell-bent on undermining the Christian faith, then I would be encouraging Christians to keep teaching creationism.

There is a group of atheists, Christians, and theists of many stripes who all agree that your science has nothing to do with your religious beliefs. Science is way too important and way too awesome to see it ruined by unnecessary religious traditions such as young earth creationism.

 

[Truly1999]

Btw, I believe that the Earth revolves around the Sun. However, my faith is compatible with science. I believe in Evolution and in Creation, and the following quote from the US National Academies of Science backs me up:

'Science and religion are based on different aspects of human experience. In science, explanations must be based on evidence drawn from examining the natural world. Scientifically based observations or experiments that conflict with an explanation eventually must lead to modification or even abandonment of that explanation. Religious faith, in contrast, does not depend only on empirical evidence, is not necessarily modified in the face of conflicting evidence, and typically involves supernatural forces or entities. Because they are not a part of nature, supernatural entities cannot be investigated by science. In this sense, science and religion are separate and address aspects of human understanding in different ways. Attempts to pit science and religion against each other create controversy where none needs to exist.'

http://www.nas.edu/evolution/Compatibility.html

Therefore, whilst some Creationists might want to rush to debate, and it is useful when debating at the Higher Education levels, as your run-of-the-mill, garden-variety Christian, I still don't feel the urge.

 

[Chicken Little]

so you keep telling us and telling us and telling us and telling us...............

 

[Truly1999]

so you keep telling us and telling us and telling us and telling us...............

???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

 

[Chicken Little]

'Science and religion are based on different aspects of human experience. In science, explanations must be based on evidence drawn from examining the natural world.'

sorry but they don't know squat about the natural world.
it is by my own and my cultures ancient knowledge that I understand the natural world around me . but some guy with some binoculars don't know what he is looking at, and guy with a microscope knows even less what is happening.
their predictions are not close much less right or in any way facts . but people are told over and over and over they know the facts so we hear about all these "facts" and still no one predicts it right , nor even asks the right questions to predict the rights answers.
they don't have facts or even good theories.. they have only lies and militant lies at that.

 

[Truly1999]

sorry but they don't know squat about the natural world.
it is by my own and my cultures ancient knowledge that I understand the natural world around me . but some guy with some binoculars don't know what he is looking at, and guy with a microscope knows even less what is happening.
their predictions are not close much less right or in any way facts . but people are told over and over and over they know the facts so we hear about all these "facts" and still no one predicts it right , nor even asks the right questions to predict the rights answers.
they don't have facts or even good theories.. they have only lies and militant lies at that.

Until I went to university, I used to believe that there was just one set of facts and that they were set in stone. However, I soon realised that in all academic study there are many differences of opinion, and that it is based largely upon interpretation, which is constantly being challenged. Scientists put up a convincing front that there is a consistent narrative, backed up by 'fact'. Sometimes, but it's usually from independent scientists and not those belonging to an academy, you hear in public about substantial disagreement on key issues. I suspect that this wall that is put up by scientists is maintained through strict discipline. At undergraduate level, students can get away with voicing their opinion and are encouraged to do so as a way of developing their mind. But, when it comes to postgraduate study, they are expected to 'play ball', as I was told when I applied to my university for postgraduate study, and so I gathered from my lecturer's statement that I would be expected to conduct my research and give my opinion within the general framework of the aims and objectives of the faculty.

Also, tectonic shifts can occur according to funding priorities. In the UK, the Glasgow Media Group argued that universities were being politicized by the Conservative government under Margaret Thatcher to produce right-wing reports and analysis by starving left-wing universities of funding and encouraging right-wing universities with extra funding. So, we should be analysing the politics more in every aspect of life - sometimes, we can be naïve in our thinking, including me.

 

[sfs]

Until I went to university, I used to believe that there was just one set of facts and that they were set in stone. However, I soon realised that in all academic study there are many differences of opinion, and that it is based largely upon interpretation, which is constantly being challenged. Scientists put up a convincing front that there is a consistent narrative, backed up by 'fact'. Sometimes, but it's usually from independent scientists and not those belonging to an academy, you hear in public about substantial disagreement on key issues. I suspect that this wall that is put up by scientists is maintained through strict discipline. At undergraduate level, students can get away with voicing their opinion and are encouraged to do so as a way of developing their mind. But, when it comes to postgraduate study, they are expected to 'play ball', as I was told when I applied to my university for postgraduate study, and so I gathered from my lecturer's statement that I would be expected to conduct my research and give my opinion within the general framework of the aims and objectives of the faculty.

I went through undergraduate and graduate training in science, and I've been doing more or less academic science for the last 25 years in two different fields, and I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

 

[Loudmouth]

Until I went to university, I used to believe that there was just one set of facts and that they were set in stone. However, I soon realised that in all academic study there are many differences of opinion, and that it is based largely upon interpretation, which is constantly being challenged. Scientists put up a convincing front that there is a consistent narrative, backed up by 'fact'. Sometimes, but it's usually from independent scientists and not those belonging to an academy, you hear in public about substantial disagreement on key issues.

What are these key issues as they apply to evolution?

Also, the entire purpose of science is to interpret facts.

At undergraduate level, students can get away with voicing their opinion and are encouraged to do so as a way of developing their mind. But, when it comes to postgraduate study, they are expected to 'play ball', as I was told when I applied to my university for postgraduate study, and so I gathered from my lecturer's statement that I would be expected to conduct my research and give my opinion within the general framework of the aims and objectives of the faculty.

What field of study were you going into? What were you not allowed to voice your opinion on?

Also, tectonic shifts can occur according to funding priorities. In the UK, the Glasgow Media Group argued that universities were being politicized by the Conservative government under Margaret Thatcher to produce right-wing reports and analysis by starving left-wing universities of funding and encouraging right-wing universities with extra funding. So, we should be analysing the politics more in every aspect of life - sometimes, we can be naïve in our thinking, including me.

What experiments would creationists need funding for?

 

[Chicken Little]

sure a
teacher doesn't have either the will or the time to try and understand other perspectives. even if you could explain those perspectives in 8th grade or even 55 with the terminology of any other persons cultures with boxes which were built to justify their own assumptions , you can't use their terms with their loaded assumptions . so if there was a way to explain it with the boxed created by academia who don't know nature or history at all except for what they have pre-imposed of themselves into it . They all do that with religion and ancient history issues exactly the same way . Every term is preloaded into the gun to shot everyone in the foot who even tries to explain another angle or effect that has to be dealt with someday. and certainly and 8th grader may want to shoot back with other terms, concepts and boxes , but who will listen? no one has time, everyone is short on time . but they worship time and just add it to their theories like they own it.

 

[Loudmouth]

sure a
teacher doesn't have either the will or the time to try and understand other perspectives. even if you could explain those perspectives in 8th grade or even 55 with the terminology of any other persons cultures with boxes which were built to justify their own assumptions , you can't use their terms with their loaded assumptions . so if there was a way to explain it with the boxed created by academia who don't know nature or history at all except for what they have pre-imposed of themselves into it . They all do that with religion and ancient history issues exactly the same way . Every term is preloaded into the gun to shot everyone in the foot who even tries to explain another angle or effect that has to be dealt with someday. and certainly and 8th grader may want to shoot back with other terms, concepts and boxes , but who will listen? no one has time, everyone is short on time . but they worship time and just add it to their theories like they own it.

Can you give any examples of what you are talking about?

 

[Chicken Little]

Can you give any examples of what you are talking about?

from history? nature ? religion? take your pick!

 

[Loudmouth]

from history? nature ? religion? take your pick!

Take your pick.

 

[Truly1999]

I went through undergraduate and graduate training in science, and I've been doing more or less academic science for the last 25 years in two different fields, and I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

I can only understand two or three possible reasons for your reply. 1. you have never looked into this aspect of academia. or 2. you have been successfully indoctrinated from a young age. or 3. you have not yet either reached the political levels of your field or you have not yet been placed in a situation where you have had to choose to challenge the status quo or to remain quiet and comply. Perhaps I am mistaken.

 

[Chicken Little]

maybe give me a few days to try and figure out when , where and how or even IF .
but sorry, using words that don't exist in someones ideas or vocabulary, then dealing with their assumptions about an idea.. makes it very very hard to convey any sort of new life altering concepts or even not life altering . how to do that simply is hard. and if I do it too simple you won't get the full implications of that concept and it's effect either .
or should I try for a way less life altering concept, then I will not be dealing with anyones cognitive dissonance also because we all got that thing .
so if it causes too much pain to the brain then no one wants to try and understand it or fight through to learn it either. or it has to be in a classroom where you do it in such small bites they don't know you are hurting them because they are probably too high or tired to think anyway.


for now I plan to try and convey these things to real christian scientist if I ever get the opportunity .. because I am getting worn out trying to do it with Atheist .

I feel for Moses , who like me just didn't like to communicate.. so for now I have decided to save it up for the millennium where there will be way way more 200++++ million just baby girls needing to be taught real history and real genetics and real info about how his creation really works. maybe I will like to communicate with people better by then. I can only hope.
so give me a few days, if I get inspired.. then maybe.

 

[Truly1999]

What are these key issues as they apply to evolution?

Also, the entire purpose of science is to interpret facts.

What field of study were you going into? What were you not allowed to voice your opinion on?

What experiments would creationists need funding for?

The key issues as apply to evolution - sorry, no offence but look them up yourself, thanks, I don't have the motivation right now.

All of academic study is about interpretation. Facts are created from theories, of course, where a theory has been proved or disproved and assessed by other people, often peers. But whole "schools of thought" or "traditions" develop from ideas, where ideologies and perspectives are created, even factions, in all fields, science, humanities, social sciences.

My field of study was going to be Social Sciences, in particular research into European cultural identities.

Regarding funding - it isn't only science that needs funding, haha.

 

[Chicken Little]

Loudmouth after reading your comments I will just say NO now.

 

[sfs]

All of academic study is about interpretation. Facts are created from theories, of course, where a theory has been proved or disproved and assessed by other people, often peers. But whole "schools of thought" or "traditions" develop]from ideas, where ideologies and perspectives are created, even factions, in all fields, science, humanities, social sciences.

Either you've made a broad study of all of the sciences and the humanities, or you're generalizing from a limited set of data to fields you don't know well.

My field of study was going to be Social Sciences, in particular research into European cultural identities.

Now that's a field I have no trouble believing is rife with political factions.

 

[Loudmouth]

Loudmouth after reading your comments I will just say NO now.

In 99% of cases, this is the usual observation. Creationists make big claims they can't back up.