To all athiests out there: bring it on

[Outspoken]

"ediacarin fossils are less than 600 million years?"

This statement? I'm talking about biblical interpreation and forced acceptance of a wrong theory, not the validity of dating fossils.

 

[sulphur]

It was part of lucaspas argue ment which should not be ignored.If a person uses false evidence in a debate attack it ,do not ignore it

 

[troodon]

     Firstly, I think my Calc. teacher is exceptional (he normally does give us proofs for anything of relative importance) and I fail to see how my math teacher failing to show his class certain proofs aids any of your statements. I used that as an example to try and show how continuous questioning in such a class would slow down the rate at which my peers and I learn.

     Secondly, in regards to my statement about the pixie and photosynthesis, if you want a comparison which deals with “possible holes” in scientific theory then I’ll substitute my old analogy with one in which question my bio teacher about the phospholipids bi-layer’s inexplicable permeability to polar water molecules. In class he said something about how he would bet that it had something to do with the membrane’s fluidness and non-static nature BUT would you expect him to actually waste class time if I asked him to debate me over my preferred theory that this example of permeability has to do with protein channels? To me that seems a waste of time for the entire class.

      Thirdly, in my English class we did learn about the evolution of the English language. I’m not sure if that’s part of the normal curriculum or if we only learned it because it’s an AP class. But that’s beside the point. So, in my case, that was a perfectly acceptable comparison since my class did learn about it, before we began our far too in-depth analysis of Beowulf (we actually discussed whether or not Grendel was “created by society”, another waste of the class’s time). If you were so in opposition to what your teacher was teaching I don’t see why you didn’t see him at some time outside of class. That’s what I do whenever I disagree with something the teacher says…

 

[sulphur]

Remember that the third person in a formal debate has the right to refer to the original question which I believe included the word science.

 

[Pete Harcoff]

Originally posted by Outspoken
Untrue. the book itself, LOR tells us its fiction by context.

Prove it.

 

[snerkel]

You posted: To Chuck Darwin,
I don't really know exactly how old the universe is, but we can make a rough estimate of about 6000 years old. Why, because we know (according to Caeser Augustus's census) that Jesus lived about 2000 years ago. Using that information and the information provided by the greatest history book in the world, the bible, we can use the recorded age and recoreded deaths of Jesus's ancestors to add up the years from Jesus all the way to Adam. From there to the creation was only six days. If your confused I will give this example:
Adam was 130 yrs old when he begat Seth
Seth was 105 yrs old when he begat Enosh
Enosh was 90 yrs old when he begat Kenan
and so on and so forth...
all the way to Jesus!
so all we have to do is add up all those years plus the 2000 years since Jesus lived and voila!!! The age of the earth.<<

As a Christian, I do not agree that following genealogy proves the age of the earth. In my opinion, it only shows the length of time that man may have been here. We must remember 2 Peter 3:8 "Nevertheless, do not let this one fact escape you, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day."

 

[lithium.]

As a Christian, I do not agree that following genealogy proves the age of the earth.

Huh? So you being a Christian you can't accept the facts, and evidence that science gets for the age of the universe. Is that what you are saying?

 

[Jerry Smith]

That’s what I do whenever I disagree with something the teacher says…

Which is fine, but you cannot expect every teacher to care about wasting their personal time on fruitless debates about subjects that have already been settled and for which no scientific controversy remains. I imagine it is a hard row to hoe, being a biology teacher or professor, with students who imagine you are there to entertain their self-important fantasies of being the gunslinger who will bring down the neo-darwinian "establishment." If I were doing the job, I would encourage my students to complete their education in the subject so that they could understand the position that they wanted to debate against & so that they would be prepared to take their arguments and evidence to the scientific journals where it can be reviewed by the community instead of wasting their time on li'l ole me.

 

[LewisWildermuth]

del

 

[troodon]

Well, I wasn't talking about me talking to teachers about "fruitless debates about subjects that have already been settled and for which no scientific controversy remains". I was instead suggesting that Outspoken shoud have talked to his teachers about such things outside of the classroom. The instances I alluded to in which I talked to teachers outside of class about disagreements were over things such as "I think that my whom is refering to an object thus I think it's valid" and other trivial things.

 

[troodon]

I do agree with you though that it is understandable for a teacher to not want to waste his free time debating with a student who in alll likelyhood would never consider changing his opinion on a subject. I remember several YECs in my first biology class who would not shut their mouths whenever evolution was ever mentioned. So I can understand any teachers who wouldn't discuss these kinds of topics even after class; but it's always worth trying

 

[euphoric]

Originally posted by seesaw
Huh? So you being a Christian you can't accept the facts, and evidence that science gets for the age of the universe. Is that what you are saying?

If I understood her correctly, I think she was saying that one could not extrapolate an accurate age of the universe solely by analyzing the geneologies provided by the Bible.

-brett

 

[lithium.]

Thanks. (Posting in the morning when you wake up has side effects)

 

[Jerry Smith]

Originally posted by troodon
Well, I wasn't talking about me talking to teachers about "fruitless debates about subjects that have already been settled and for which no scientific controversy remains". I was instead suggesting that Outspoken shoud have talked to his teachers about such things outside of the classroom. The instances I alluded to in which I talked to teachers outside of class about disagreements were over things such as "I think that my whom is refering to an object thus I think it's valid" and other trivial things.

Oh, no. I didn't mean to imply that is wrong to approach a teacher about a significant question whether inside or out of class. The smart ones always do. I was just making a point that when the teacher takes time out away from class for those students when they approach him with a real concern, he does so out of the goodness of his own heart, not out of obligation. That being the case, the teacher certainly cannot be obliged to humor students who are there not to clarify something the teacher said that might have been at odds with the experts in the field but who are there to try to undermine the field itself. Doubtlessly this happens a lot to biology teachers, and it is in their own best interest and well within their rights to not dignify that behavior with a response.

 

[sulphur]

When you have an18 year old come out aggressivelly talking about arguements you solved 20 years ago at university you do get a little upset when they don't listen to reason.

 

[Morat]

Or, most likely, when you're having a hard time keeping to your class schedule as is, and some idiot in the front row is piping up with "The Second Law of Thermodynamics says evolution is impossible" when he wouldn't recognize thermo equations if you tattoed them on his little hiney, you probably have no urge whatsoever to discuss it with him during class time.

From personal experience, 2/3rds of debating with Creationists on the "high school level" is teaching them a bunch of physics, chemistry, and biology just so they can understand their own objections.

 

[Outspoken]

"I used that as an example to try and show how continuous questioning in such a class would slow down the rate at which my peers and I learn. "

And I rebutted showing you he should and gave you an example about it as well.

"In class he said something "

Great, see he actually addressed your question and showed you a possible answer. This was not the case in my experience, thus there is no comparision possible here.

"were so in opposition to what your teacher was teaching I don’t see why you didn’t see him at some time outside of class."

This seems a prevalient problem among posters here. I did and I even posted I did, you're not reading.


"Prove it."

I did, which section is it published under? The author SPECIFICALLY had it published under fiction, which is a very big clue.


"that have already been settled and for which no scientific controversy remains. "

Jerry, so you think a teacher's office hours shouldn't be made to solve the questions of students? Hmmfff..okay...?

 

[Outspoken]

"From personal experience, 2/3rds of debating with Creationists on the "high school level" is teaching them a bunch of physics, chemistry, and biology just so they can understand their own objections."

wow..and mort does more then someone in the actual profession according to you guys...asounding..someone who devotes their life to education (teachers) and they are out done by someone on a message board....

 

[JohnR7]

Originally posted by Morat
From personal experience, 2/3rds of debating with Creationists on the "high school level" is teaching them a bunch of physics, chemistry, and biology just so they can understand their own objections.

Creationists spend most of their time teaching people the Bible.  Just trying to get them up to a high school level of understanding about the Bible.

 

[snerkel]

Originally posted by seesaw
Huh? So you being a Christian you can't accept the facts, and evidence that science gets for the age of the universe. Is that what you are saying?

Apparently, you misunderstood my post. I stated in my post: "I do NOT agree that following genealogy proves the age of the earth."

Just for clarification, I am NOT a young earth creationist.