You do realize that those are frauds, don't you?What if they taught about the finding of the ark (of Noah) upon the Mt's of Ararat, with a satellite image included, along with actual fragments tested in lab:
What if they taught about other subjects in geology, archeology and paleontology that rarely get a mention:
What if they taught about other subjects in geology, archeology and paleontology that rarely get a mention:
What if they taught about other subjects in geology, archeology and paleontology that rarely get a mention:
Of course one can not have theocratic courses in nations that have freedom of religion. One needs something much stronger than one's personal belief in a holy book.
It is quite obvious that lack of creationism is wrecking the USA. You cannot have a country with a constitution and freedom of opinion, when the citizens are in doubt whether free will exists at all.
. I simply believe that they are stories . Period ! The Creation stories don’t have much to do with natural phenomena and that’s been known for over 300 years now. We discovered this gradually over a long time . Astronomical research refuted a flat earth and a geocentric universe. Geological research refuted a global flood and a short time frame. Biological research ,just using gross anatomy , information from breeders, and the then sparse fossil record , refuted separate creation 150 years ago! No one should believe pseudoscience nonsense because acting as if it’s true can be harmful. The current measles epidemic should point that out . People accepted a pseudoscience belief and it’s harming them. Creationism as reality is harmful especially the pseudoscience belief in separate creation simply because it undercuts medical research.You seem to believe that the Bible's creation accounts are lies. How does that influence the way you read the rest of the Bible. If humanity didn't fall away from God, why did we need a Savior.
First off , biblical inerrancy is a myth . Anyone with even the slightest knowledge of the history of the bible knows that’s nonsense. Since scientists report on what Nature says about itself and we use that for our technology, I’m more inclined to trust science. If they get it wrong then nature (aka God’s Creation) will let us know that it’s wrong! Science as a field doesn’t have an egotistical bent on accepting pseudoscience like creationists do. Creationists, like an toddler throwing a tantrum, simply won’t admit that they’re wrong . And yeah ,creationists insistence on these fantasies does look like tantrum throwing to anyone who is scientifically literate. “NO! NO NO NO NO NO” with no reasoning behind itInteresting how a Christian like you chooses to place anything before God's inspired word. What you seem to lack Brighty is that if science says one thing and God's Truth says another, God wins.
All of that is taught as part of critical thinking in the better sort of high school already. What has it to do with indoctrinating students to accept the literal inerrancy of Genesis? Indeed, teaching critical thinking skills is generally objected to by creationists because they understand that a person capable of critical thinking will generally reject creationism.Only number one would possibly be taught in creationism class, but arguably only creatio ex nihilo is correct.
What would be taught in creationism class:
1. what is a choice?
2. what is an opinion?
3. what is a fact?
4. which words belong in the category of matters of opinion, and which words belong in the category of matters of fact.
The way you set up creationism is theocratic. It is not respecting of freedom of opinion.
First off , biblical inerrancy is a myth . Anyone with even the slightest knowledge of the history of the bible knows that’s nonsense. Since scientists report on what Nature says about itself and we use that for our technology, I’m more inclined to trust science. If they get it wrong then nature (aka God’s Creation) will let us know that it’s wrong! Science as a field doesn’t have an egotistical bent on accepting pseudoscience like creationists do. Creationists, like an toddler throwing a tantrum, simply won’t admit that they’re wrong . And yeah ,creationists insistence on these fantasies does look like tantrum throwing to anyone who is scientifically literate. “NO! NO NO NO NO NO” with no reasoning behind it
There are already many of those, mostly run by evangelical/fundamental religious institutions and churches.We should totally start creationist schools and universities.
All of that is taught as part of critical thinking in the better sort of high school already. What has it to do with indoctrinating students to accept the literal inerrancy of Genesis? Indeed, teaching critical thinking skills is generally objected to by creationists because they understand that a person capable of critical thinking will generally reject creationism.
I still don't see how subjectivity is a creationist concept. Creationism is based on the creation stories of Genesis being 100% accurate factual history--and if they are not, creationists insist the Christian faith would be untenable. It is creationists who hate subjective opinion and want to have everything be factual.No it isn't taught anywhere at all. Everybody hates subjective opinion, including Christians. This is really what is so bad about humanity in general, the way everybody beats up on the concept of subjective opinion, and wants to have everything be factual.
Subjectivity is an inherently creationist concept. As you can see in the OP, category 1. Subjectivity is only taught implicitly, in that the existence of God and the soul is regarded as a matter of faith. Also choosing, the mechanism of creation, is nowhere taught about. They are implicit in traditional creationism, but not explicitly taught.
I still don't see how subjectivity is a creationist concept. Creationism is based on the creation stories of Genesis being 100% accurate factual history--and if they are not, creationists insist the Christian faith would be untenable. It is creationists who hate subjective opinion and want to have everything be factual.
I'm sticking up for those you had in mind, when you said:I never said that you did.
I know it makes us look superior when we belittle the "ignorance" of others, but I submit if you make it into a quotient (what they knew / what was available to know), the ignorance disappears.People back then didn't draw the same distinction that we do now between literal history and mythology.
I'm sticking up for those you had in mind, when you said:
I know it makes us look superior when we belittle the "ignorance" of others, but I submit if you make it into a quotient (what they knew / what was available to know), the ignorance disappears.
Was Paul Morphy ignorant?
Ignorance is almost always about ignorance of some particular topic. So was Morphy ignorant of certain matters, especially compared to the knowledge that we have today? Of course he was. Were the writers of the Old Testament ignorant about the scientific facts of the world that they lived in? Without a doubt. They all have a good excuse for their ignorance. It was not due to laziness or a mental defect. It was due to the fact that the knowledge had not been developed yet. Those people have an excuse for their ignorance. Modern day creationists have no excuse when it comes to their religious based beliefs.I'm sticking up for those you had in mind, when you said:
I know it makes us look superior when we belittle the "ignorance" of others, but I submit if you make it into a quotient (what they knew / what was available to know), the ignorance disappears.
Was Paul Morphy ignorant?
Ignorance is almost always about ignorance of some particular topic. So was Morphy ignorant of certain matters, especially compared to the knowledge that we have today? Of course he was. Were the writers of the Old Testament ignorant about the scientific facts of the world that they lived in? Without a doubt. They all have a good excuse for their ignorance. It was not due to laziness or a mental defect. It was due to the fact that the knowledge had not been developed yet. Those people have an excuse for their ignorance. Modern day creationists have no excuse when it comes to their religious based beliefs.
modern day creationists are wilfully ignorant. They chose to not be literate in the sciences . The skewed and bizarre universe is one that creationists live in as it’s as incoherent as a Dali paintingThat's an accusation modernday creationists are lazy and ignorant.
Creationists have a better understanding than most about how things are chosen in the universe. Creationists have a better understanding of subjectivity, which is an inherently creationist concept.
The fact is science has focused on cause and effect understanding, things being forced, because it was useful for developing technology. But it made for a very skewed, and very bizarre understanding of the universe. You cannot be a scientist and not be a creationist.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?