5/10/2005: Dinosaur tracks

[lookout123]

at the risk of permanently derailing this thread with the ongoing cellarite obsession with creationism vs. evolution...

OC - i think it is important to teach what is known and believed about origins in the schools.

-evolution as it is understood should be taught - as the theory that it is. be clear about what is fact, and what is currently unproven.
-creationism shouldn't be taught in the schools. i believe in a Creator. the creator you believe in may not be the same as mine.

---what i absolutely do not support is the method of teaching evolution that my beloved teacher (who was also one of my wrestling coaches) used. "ok, class. raise your hand if you believe in a god. keep your hands up if you believe that you he created the world. ok. now keep your hands up if you believe that you were created in his image... *surveys the room* well, those of you with your hands in their should understand that you are the very definition of stupidity."

- it is possible to teach evolution and acknowledge that there are other ideas out there. it is for the parents to teach their children creationism if they so choose. it is not for a teacher to ridicule a student who believes in a creator. it is not for a teacher to misrepresent what is fact and theory in evolution.

[Beestie]

Originally Posted by OnyxCougar

Nor should Evolution as origin of man.

At one point, the "theory" that the earth revolved around the sun was advanced because there was some pretty decent evidence to back it up. The church was convinced that the earth was the center of the universe. The church fucked up and, 300-400 years later, finally came to terms with it.

There is a boatload more evidence to support the idea that man evolved from a lower species and that the universe is ±13B years old than there is to support the 6-day version and your stubborn reluctance to acknowledge that is nothing short of baffling. Much of what Jesus taught was "dumbed down" into parables and metaphors so that the people could understand - without a loss in clarity or meaning. Yet, the story of Genesis - a story without witnesses - which isn't even a doctrinal matter - and you treat each word as though they were tax form instructions.

Doesn't that also mean that only 144,000 people get to go to heaven?

Literalism cannot be applied to the Bible.

[Troubleshooter]

Originally Posted by OnyxCougar

And the tracks you refer to that were faked are the paluxy tracks.

Thanks

[OnyxCougar]

Originally Posted by mlandman

Evolution isn't religion, humanist or otherwise. Nor is the presence of dinosaurs.

-mike

Evolution as pertaining to origins *is* most assuredly a religion. See the thread in Philosophy to continue that argument.

[lookout123]

Doesn't that also mean that only 144,000 people get to go to heaven?

not to nitpick, but that isn't in the Bible. 144,000 does refer to the Jews who will become followers of Christ post second-coming. these 144,000 will spend the coming years gathering as much of the Jewish nation to Christ as they can. there is no mention of how many people can go to heaven in the Bible.

there are some christian denominations that have gotten some bizarre ideas that THEY are the 144,000. (LDS, 7thday adventists, etc.)

some people have even been known to take fragments of Biblical teachings out of context. shocking, i know.

[wolf]

Where do you want them to learn about evolution, OC? On the street? The internet? I don't think it's a topic that one can reasonably hold off until college.

[mlandman]

Originally Posted by OnyxCougar

Evolution as pertaining to origins *is* most assuredly a religion. See the thread in Philosophy to continue that argument.

We disagree. It is obviously a hot topic amongst religious debates. It is clearly related to subject matter that most religions teach. It is absolutely controversial. However, I don't think it's 'a religion'.

Wiccans (silly bastards) are a religion, I suppose. And if one wants to treat the 'earth mother' as a 'religion' I *****suppose***** that might make sense.

"evolution" is NOT a religion. It's like saying that 'baptism' is a religion. Baptism is a practice within Christianity. Christianity is a religion.

Evolution is NOT a religion.

-mike

[jaguar]

but seriously, don't you get tired of dogging people who hold faith in a higher power than themselves? it goes in spurts around here. nothing for awhile, and then several threads will careen off into christian bashing.

Lately it's mostly been me. Why? Few reasons:
More stuff about a new party back in Australia that tried to make abortion and creationism election issues. The whole Kansas 're-defining science' shit. Some groups pushing the creationist thing over here. mrnoodle.

I said it in the above thread, I don't give a fuck what people believe but I'm sick to the teeth of them trying to thrust their wacky fucking views on everyone else. I mean just look at OnyxCougar 2 posts above trying to claim that a scientific theory is religion for fucks sake. These people and this battle are in danger of becoming the defining cultural struggle of the 21st century, the rational verses the religious. it's not about love thy neighbour it's about trying to stop thy neighbour marrying his same-sex partner or forcing my religion down the throats of thy neighbour's son in public-funded schools or stopping thy neighbour having an abortion. As far as I and many others are concerned there is no more place for this shit in politics than there is sharia law or any other religious code.

While your teacher might've gone a little far lookout why in hell should time be given in a classroom to anything other than scientific theory?. Should the class on the solar system be prefaced with - 'this is only a scientific theory, some people think the earth is a disk that sits on the back of four elephants that in turn stand on a gigantic turtle swimming though space'? Why not? Comes from the teachers of another fucking huge religion.

[lookout123]

Jag, i didn't say creationism should be taught in school. i stated that teachers should teach fact as fact and theory as theory. too many teachers don't know or don't acknowledge that even evolution proponents know that there are holes in it - holes that they hope to fill with future discovery. so unless it is proven - evolution is a theory with parts of it that are hard fact. teach it as such. and don't ridicule students who have been entrusted to you that see in those holes support for their belief system, be it creationist or otherwise.

as far as the christian bashing thing... you're going to do whatever you want but i, for one, would appreciate if you would limit your bashing to those that step up and do something stupid rather than just blasting - in general terms- all those who follow Christ. it just gets old

[jaguar]

there are holes. There are holes in physics too but I don't see the value in teaching that either. It's the best, most complete and most empirically supported scientific theory. That is what should be taught, nothing more, nothing less. All science is theory outside laws, students should understand that implicitly.

as for the bashing, as a rule I do, this was just a once-off vent.

[OnyxCougar]

Originally Posted by Beestie

Literalism cannot be applied to the Bible.

Then there was no reason for Jesus to exist, no saving grace, and absolutely no reason for Christianity or Judaism either.


Or you're wrong.

[OnyxCougar]

Originally Posted by mlandman

We disagree. It is obviously a hot topic amongst religious debates. It is clearly related to subject matter that most religions teach. It is absolutely controversial. However, I don't think it's 'a religion'.

Wiccans (silly bastards) are a religion, I suppose. And if one wants to treat the 'earth mother' as a 'religion' I *****suppose***** that might make sense.

"evolution" is NOT a religion. It's like saying that 'baptism' is a religion. Baptism is a practice within Christianity. Christianity is a religion.

Evolution is NOT a religion.

-mike

Please see E v C debate in Philosophy Forum.

[hot_pastrami]

Originally Posted by lookout123

Jag, i didn't say creationism should be taught in school. i stated that teachers should teach fact as fact and theory as theory. too many teachers don't know or don't acknowledge that even evolution proponents know that there are holes in it - holes that they hope to fill with future discovery.

The following is from an excellent Scientific American article:

Many people learned in elementary school that a theory falls in the middle of a hierarchy of certainty--above a mere hypothesis but below a law. Scientists do not use the terms that way, however. According to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), a scientific theory is "a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses." No amount of validation changes a theory into a law, which is a descriptive generalization about nature. So when scientists talk about the theory of evolution--or the atomic theory or the theory of relativity, for that matter--they are not expressing reservations about its truth.

In addition to the theory of evolution, meaning the idea of descent with modification, one may also speak of the fact of evolution. The NAS defines a fact as "an observation that has been repeatedly confirmed and for all practical purposes is accepted as 'true.'" The fossil record and abundant other evidence testify that organisms have evolved through time. Although no one observed those transformations, the indirect evidence is clear, unambiguous and compelling.

So when scienists call it the "theory" of evolution, it doesn't mean it's based on guesses and conjecture... it it based on real evidence, experimentation, and observation over a long period of time.

Originally Posted by OnyxCougar

Evolution as pertaining to origins *is* most assuredly a religion. See the thread in Philosophy to continue that argument.

Suggesting that evolution is a religion is just silly, unless you're using the "to pursue with zeal" definition of the word. Evolution is the explanation that fits the observable facts completely, without exception. If any evidence is ever brought to light which contradicts evolution, science will adjust or discard the theory as appropriate. In contrast, most religions are full of ambiguities, contradictory statements, and outright disprovable notions... yet these are dismissed with empty excuses such as "God works in mysterious ways."

It is an important distinction that science will always take ALL evidence into account to reach conclusions, and alter those conclusions if new evidence gives them reason to; whereas religion holds tight to all beliefs, no matter now many facts may completely contradict them.

[glatt]

In every science class I ever took, the first day of class covered the scientific method. Even my 5 year old kindergarten girl has learned about the scientific method. Why would you stop and say "this is just a theory" for the theory of evolution but not for every other theory? As jaguar said, everything in science is a theory except for a few basic laws. Does the teacher need to start each class saying "everything I'm going to teach today is just a theory?"

[Troubleshooter]

Originally Posted by OnyxCougar

Then there was no reason for Jesus to exist, no saving grace, and absolutely no reason for Christianity or Judaism either.

Not at all. People need a model to live by. Fictional or not is the question, not whether it was needed at one point or another.

It's just that some people eventually evolve cognitively to the point of being able to realize that and to differentiate.