Michigan Anti-Evolution Bill

[goat37]

to mechanical bliss
LOL you are funny.
God's word always "jives" with reality.
Evolution never jives.
So you believe you came from a rock I see.
Hummmm reality???

I just wanted to note that this is by far one of the most ignorant threads that I have seen posted on these boards.

I don't think anyone is saying we came from rocks, are we?

 

[Cantuar]

Who are you people.
Eugenie Scott clones, here to keep the faith alive?

I think we have a troll.

I will leave you folks to your religion in that I see Christians here are only made fun of and bashed.

In other words, declare victory and disappear in a hurry. Classy.

 

[goat37]

Who are you people.
Eugenie Scott clones, here to keep the faith alive?
Why do you come to a Christian website?
I will leave you folks to your religion in that I see Christians here are only made fun of and bashed.
I pray you folks are not the moderators here. If so, I can see why the world is in such a mess.

Yea, we are all just a bunch of satanic heathens forming our own cult under the guise of an innocent christian message board. We are telling all those that will listen our outrageous and false stories about a really old earth, and life evolving into different forms over the course of the last 800 million years.... wow... feel the evil...

 

[Mechanical Bliss]

I will leave you folks to your religion in that I see Christians here are only made fun of and bashed.

In case you haven't noticed, many people trying to educate you on evolution and correct your grossly incorrect assertions are actually Christians themselves. Furthermore, the majority of Christians accept the theory of evolution.

You have been fed an incorrect definition of what evolution is and what it implies about your religion. Also, no one is "bashing" you, but we are correcting your blatantly false misconceptions. Do you really think we haven't heard this stuff before? It's like banging one's head against a wall...

 

[samiam]

In case you haven't noticed, many people trying to educate you on evolution and correct your grossly incorrect assertions are actually Christians themselves. Furthermore, the majority of Christians accept the theory of evolution.

I have just reported this poster to a moderator; asserting that beliveing in evolution makes you a non-Christian crosses the line, and moderators have rebuked other posters for doing that. As I pointed out in my report, while I am sure we can eventually chase him out of here, the signal-to-noise ratio around here will be lower until he goes bye-bye.

-Sam

 

[troodon]

I remember when we started discussing evolution my teacher said "The suits asked me to cover creationism at the same time as evolution. Their "theory" (made air quotes) is that God created everything, any questions?" class, all 2 of us, laughed. "Ok, then moving on!".

Why do you come to a Christian website?

Because I'm a Christian

I will leave you folks to your religion in that I see Christians here are only made fun of and bashed.

That's funny, I've only been made bashed by YECs on this website.

 

[TheBear]

Let's stay focused on the topic at hand, and not reduce this discussion to ad hominem attacks.

Discuss the topic at hand, not the participants of this discussion.

 

[Pete Harcoff]

Back to the topic at hand, I find this part of the bill very odd:

(b) In the science standards for middle and high school, all references to "evolution" and "natural selection" shall be modified to indicate that these are unproven theories by adding the phrase "Describe how life may be the result of the purposeful, intelligent design of a Creator.". (emphasis mine)

Last time I checked, ID hadn't even gotten past the hurdle of determining how to detect intelligent design in organisms, let alone describe how a creator would have even gone about designing life.

Basically, what could they possibly teach to this effect?

 

[jon1101]

ID and creationism do not belong in science class as VALID theories because they are falsified scientific theories. Not because they are not scientific.

ID is often times considered a philosophical position and is, in my opinion, still alive and kicking. Obviously with all the contention between various schools of thought who argue for some form of ID (with varying degrees of sanity) the term has become rather ambiguous, but I think bluntly caling ID a fasified scientific theory, or ANY kind of scientific theory for that matter, is a bit short of the whole truth. Of course, I agree that ID is "not in the least bit scientific" and ought to be taught as a teological position rather than as a scientific theory.

-jon

 

[wblastyn]

Why do I always hear creationists say evolution says (really abiogenesis) that we came from rocks? I thought life formed in the thermal vents of the oceans or something?

Did the elements to form life come from the rocks in the ocean or something, or is this one of those made up creationist things?

 

[samiam]

Last time I checked, ID hadn't even gotten past the hurdle of determining how to detect intelligent design in organisms, let alone describe how a creator would have even gone about designing life.

Basically, what could they possibly teach to this effect?

I think what the people who support this bill want is to not have Christians lose their faith when they start learning about evolution and cosmology. Unfortunatly, this bill is the completely wrong approach.

There are several ways to handle this. One is the reactionary approach, which is to try to turn the clock back on science 200 years. This approach, of course, is dommed to fail.

Another is to completely lose faith in God; many people, when they finally are forced to accept the overwhelming evidence for evolution, throw the baby out with the bathwater and become non-Christians.

The third arroach is a form of theistic evolution; this needs to be done in the churches, not the public schools. More preachers need to stand at the pulpit and declare that you can belive in evolution and God. Every preacher which stands at the podium and declares evolution a "Godless lie" is putting their congreation in a trap where the only escapes are continued denial, or a serious risk of completely losing faith in God.

I recently learned something about the psychology of grief in a consoling class I was taking. It stated that the first reaction to a tramatic event is to completely deny the event; to attempt to hold on to the past. This puts the person in a very psychologically unhealthy place. It is only when someone lets go of the past, and accepts their new reality, that they can move on and grow again.

Cretionists are people holding on to a past which can never come back; these people need to let go and move on.

- Sam

 

[Pete Harcoff]

Did the elements to form life come from the rocks in the ocean or something, or is this one of those made up creationist things?

It's a strawman version of abiogenesis. Basically, they create an abiogenesis parody where a rock turns into a living organism. The reality is that the organic compounds on Earth are a wee bit more complicated than that.

 

[troodon]

It's a strawman version of abiogenesis. Basically, they create an abiogenesis parody where a rock turns into a living organism. The reality is that the organic compounds on Earth are a wee bit more complicated than that.

Well, in his audio seminars, Hovind rationalizes it by saying that at one point the solar system consisted of nothing but a debris field orbiting the sun. So, he says, debris field=asteroids=rocks+time=you

 

[ikester7579]

Sure Science is fact. We couldn't teach it if it wasn't. Of course it can be challenged. But some challenges are just weak and silly. Like saying "It's not a virus! It's a demon that's making people sick!" Any challenge based on strong, backed up facts is worth making. The scientific community challenges each other. Is it because they're weak? Of course not. They just want the strongest evidence and the strongest possible answer. Challenge doesn't always equal disagreeing.

Facts that science says is facts(theories). Evidence that only science controls. Anything that does not fall into their sheme of ideas is false, whether they can prove it or not. Just because something cannot be explain by science, and their realm of what things are, and what things should be, and what is acceptable according to their rules, regulations and definitions of what is precieved as fact, truth or theory. Half the time I find that when pinned down, science cannot make up their minds which that it is or is not what they say it is and is often changed. And their definition of what is can be taken anyway you choose to fit any arguement at hand.

Scientific theories don't prove or disprove anything.

My point exackly. But yet lets teach it as fact.

And sure we can have loads of theories...as long as they have facts and evidence to back them. And science doesn't make 'claims' or 'fantastic theories'...and if they are just that, they will be debunked, shipped out, and probably embraced my some cult group or something.

And what group are you refering to?

Science never says a God does not exist. Nor does it say a God does exist. The problem is Creationsim/ID shouldn't be taught in a science class. Why? It's not science.

Only because science can't explain it.

I have no problem with it being taught, as long as it's taught in the right class and everyone gets their fair say...Hindu, Christian, Egyptian...everyone.

Funny you should say that. Because all other religions are taught in history class except christian. Could you explain that? Also you can find books teaching these religions and how to worship, but the bible is no where to be found? Fair say? I think not.

 

[ikester7579]

Science classes are there to teach young students the basics of science. It is not "pick what you like".

Would you like a law that had churches teach all the competing "facts" about all the different deities? After all, what do you have to fear?

I have no problem with that because God gives us a choice. A choice we don't have in school.

 

[troodon]

Funny you should say that. Because all other religions are taught in history class except christian.

What schools teach those religions in history class? Certainly not mine. We only touched on religion when it was essential for the subject matter (like we learned the original differences between Shiites and Sunnis when we learned about the Islamic Empire). But, we also learned about the East-West Schism and the Reformation, as well as the creation of the Anglican church and that thing where they had one Pope in France and the other in Rome (forgive me for forgetting the name, 7th grade was long ago). So, all in all, it seems like I learned much more about Christianity than I did about Islam when I was in public school. We didn't even mention Hinduism.

Also you can find books teaching these religions and how to worship, but the bible is no where to be found? Fair say? I think not.

At my high school, the Bible was the only religious text to be found in our library (trust me, I looked). Forgive my frankness, but either my school is some bizarre exception (because you know how we are all just a bunch of fundies here in California ) or you are just making up this gross generalization to make it seem like you are oppressed.

 

[Pete Harcoff]

Facts that science says is facts(theories). Evidence that only science controls.

<snip>

Nice conspiracy theories, but they don't pan out. There is no conspiracy to control science. Anyone can perform science. Anyone can do research and gather data.

The issue you appear to have is that the generally accepted scientific views contradict your personal beliefs. Which is fine in and of itself, but then ranting about scientific conspiracies is just silly.

There's no conspiracy. And just ignore that black helicopter circling your house.

 

[ikester7579]

And so it should be. A society like this depends on having a significant proportion of its population be functionally scientifically literate. Introducing thinly veiled theology into science class while suggesting that a fundamental biological theory is somehow lacking because it's "unproven" is not the way to do that.

And have you found the missing link yet?

There's enough science out there to keep a high school curriculum busy just getting through the basics. There's no time and no advantage to introducing stuff that hasn't been part of scientific research and isn't likely to be any time soon. Schoolkids need a grounding in the scientific method and an appreciation of the basics, not a bunch of stuff that's gone no farther than popular books and message boards and is opposed on scientific grounds by just about every professional research scientist who's come across it.



Science is a method that depends on the laws of nature to explain observed phenomena. Purposeful intelligent Creators aren't part of science;

Because is not smart enough to explain a creator.

the ID people have tied their Creator too closely to overthrowing methodological naturalism for anybody to take ID seriously as real science.

So what is real science? It's everything that falls into their rules and definitions of what things should be in their opinions which are worth more than anything in the universe(according to them).

Sort of like how a turkey should be as happy about Thanksgiving as humans are? The ID movement wants to replace methodological naturalism with a new and improved science that isn't limited by the laws of nature in the same way that the scientific method is. Why would scientists be happy about their discipline being threatened by people who want to renew science and society and have been bankrolled by the Chalcedon Foundation in the process?

Threatened? Challenged! Science should be able to stand any challenge. If it's built on a firm foundation.

The theory of evolution is as well backed up as you describe.

I seem to remember a very vital piece missing. The missing link! But I guess that vital thing just keeps getting over looked. You may not like it being brought up. But it's very important, don't you think? Or is this no longer needed?

But that hasn't stopped any of the creationist groups, has it?

why should it? until missing link is found, it's not fact, period!

Their motivation isn't scientific; their motivation, for young Earthers, is to get their interpretation of the Bible taught in public schools and used as the basis for law and society in general, and, for IDists, to replace the current secular society with a post-naturalistic one.

Science and their old earth theories, has had the Bible thrown out of school. Name me another reason it was removed that did not have anything to do with science? So a battle was started by science against God. And it will be faught as such. This is also the reason that those in the christian faith do not get along with science. Science did not want anything in their way while they taught their theories. God and those who follow him were in the way. So we were gotten out of the way. Then to make sure we did not come back the bible was thrown out of school. Kids are suspended and expelled for bringing it to school. Thanks to science. And you wonder why we fight for our rights?

In both cases, they're attacking the scientific method because it's perceived as part of the foundation of this nasty atheistic secular society that they want to get rid of. The fact that a scientific theory is very well supported is irrelevant to them. This isn't about science as far as they're concerned.

And we will continue.

You know that isn't true. Do you actually read what people write here? Or do you just forget it the minute you've read it?



The problem is that basically this isn't about science. Scientists care about science, and they don't want to see it wrecked as collateral damage by a group of people who want to create a Christian theocracy.

Believe what you want. This has just begun. And with the help of www.aclj.org we will be making strides in obtaining our rights back.

 

[ikester7579]

@ikester: The problem is: ID is a falsified theory. Evolution is not. So we might as well teach the Easter Bunny in science class, according to your view.

And where's your missing link? O yeah, that's not important anymore. According to science rules and theories. There's no truth, just theories. And anyone one who says they have truth, are lying, right?

 

[troodon]

The missing link!...until missing link is found

Please specify what two taxonomic groups you would like to see linked with transitional individuals.

Threatened? Challenged! Science should be able to stand any challenge. If it's built on a firm foundation.

Wow, that sounds so much like a line Dr. Zaius (of Planet of the Apes fame) would have said.

Science and their old earth theories, has had the Bible thrown out of school.

There were 5 copies of the Bible nestled comfortably on a shelf in the middle of my high school. Also, my AP English teacher had some copies in her room as well for her honors class (where the Bible, including Genesis, is discussed for its literary merit). Far from being "thrown out of school".

So a battle was started by science against God

This is why you remain so blind to the truth of creation.

Kids are suspended and expelled for bringing it to school.

Cite examples please. All my friends and I brought our Bibles to school daily, reading them in class and at lunch, and no faculty cared. In fact, to suspend or expel a kid for bringing a Bible to school would be extremely unconstitutional. So, forgive my doubts, but I think you made up this claim.