How many creationists practise what they preach?

[Tree of Life]

Your beliefs are just that, beliefs, they are not backed by evidence that's why they are called beliefs, you can not teach others about your beliefs because those beliefs are peculiar to you, all others can do is imagine what you believe but they can never really know, they therefore must imagine their own beliefs in their own minds, that ultimately means that no two beliefs are the same and your God and theirs is unlike any other Gods ever imagined before.

You should take an entry level epistemology course. A local community college near you might offer one.

 

[Loudmouth]

Well. We're not really talking about "science", strictly speaking. We're talking about education and, more specifically, public schooling.

We are talking about science class in public schools. If you are teaching students how to do science, you show them how to apply the scientific method and follow the evidence.

It's just good pedagogy to recognize our current beliefs and dominate cultural beliefs as we learn new ideas.

Why?

 

[Extraneous]

What evidence do they not follow?

They allow their personal beliefs to be a factor in their interpretation of evidence. They are bias and it clouds their judgment, just as it doesn't every one else. They are no different than other people, they only think they are.Thats what i was saying.

 

[Tree of Life]

We are talking about science class in public schools. If you are teaching students how to do science, you show them how to apply the scientific method and follow the evidence.

Science class in public schools is not really teaching kids how to do science so much as it is teaching what science is and what information science has uncovered about the world. People learn how to do science in college and grad school.

Why?

It helps to expose the relevance of the idea we're learning. This is what Jesus did in the Sermon on the Mount. "You have heard that it was said X...But I say to you Y..." He starts with what they've been taught and what they think they know then he exposes them to a new idea. They then have the opportunity to compare, contrast, and think critically. Education is not just about data transfer. It's about forming young people into good, critical thinkers and good citizens.

 

[Extraneous]

Christians can't follow the evidence?

Sure we can, that however doesn't mean that it must be interpreted the same way as a theist or an atheist see it, or even how a particular denomination in Christianity sees it either.

 

[Loudmouth]

Sure we can, that however doesn't mean that it must be interpreted the same way as a theist or an atheist see it, or even how a particular denomination in Christianity sees it either.

I have yet to see a creationist who actually interprets the evidence in a way consistent with the scientific method.

 

[AV1611VET]

Atheists follow the evidence ...

Sometimes evidence shows up too late: Thaliomide

 

[Extraneous]

Atheists follow the evidence because they have no gods to follow, what else can anyone who lives in the real world do?

Atheists are bias, just as all humans are, and it clouds their judgment. They think they alone interpret things infallibly, and that their consensus is always right. This however is not true.

 

[Loudmouth]

Science class in public schools is not really teaching kids how to do science so much as it is teaching what science is and what information science has uncovered about the world. People learn how to do science in college and grad school.

How to do science is what science is. The discoveries made by science came from following the evidence.

It helps to expose the relevance of the idea we're learning. This is what Jesus did in the Sermon on the Mount. "You have heard that it was said X...But I say to you Y..." He starts with what they've been taught and what they think they know then he exposes them to a new idea. They then have the opportunity to compare, contrast, and think critically. Education is not just about data transfer. It's about forming young people into good, critical thinkers and good citizens.

Beliefs have no relevance in science.

 

[Extraneous]

I have yet to see a creationist who actually interprets the evidence in a way consistent with the scientific method.

How would you know for sure? Your judgment isn't infallible is it? Not even a consensus is infallible.

 

[Loudmouth]

Sometimes evidence shows up too late: Thaliomide

So says the person who told the evidence to "take a hike".

 

[Extraneous]

What evidence do they not follow?

The evidence of mans own fallibility for one thing. They think because a consensus agrees on something that it cannot be wrong. They think everyone must bow to their consensus. I think its dangerous to throw out healthy skepticism and just follow a consensus, blindly. That happened in Nazi Germany, and that didn't end well.

 

[Tree of Life]

How to do science is what science is. The discoveries made by science came from following the evidence.



Beliefs have no relevance in science.

lol. You keep pounding that drum.

 

[Loudmouth]

How would you know for sure? Your judgment isn't infallible is it? Not even a consensus is infallible.

You don't have to be infallible to recognize that creationists don't deal with the data. For example, how does the pattern of shared DNA between species lead to the conclusion that species were separately created? What shared genetic marker between species would evidence common ancestry? What features would a fossil need in order to be a transitional fossil?

I have yet to find a creationist who can answer any of those questions.

 

[Loudmouth]

lol

Your lack of a response speaks volumes.

 

[Extraneous]

You don't have to be infallible to recognize that creationists don't deal with the data. For example, how does the pattern of shared DNA between species lead to the conclusion that species were separately created? What shared genetic marker between species would evidence common ancestry? What features would a fossil need in order to be a transitional fossil?

I have yet to find a creationist who can answer any of those questions.

They say that you dont deal with Data.

 

[Tree of Life]

Your lack of a response speaks volumes.

I would say the same for your previous post.

 

[Loudmouth]

They say that you dont deal with Data.

Biologists use both genetics and the fossil record to reach the conclusion of evolution and common ancestry.

 

[Loudmouth]

I would say the same for your previous post.

Then perhaps you didn't notice that I actually responded to your post?

 

[Extraneous]

Biologists use both genetics and the fossil record to reach the conclusion of evolution and common ancestry.

Yes, but that doesnt mean they interpret data correctly, or that a consensus must be infallible.