|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 232
200+ posts
|
|
200+ posts
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 232 |
Quote:
Darwin on trial: Evolution hearings open in Kansas
By Carey Gillam
Thu May 5, 3:45 PM ET
TOPEKA, Kan. (Reuters) - A six-day courtroom-style debate opened on Thursday in Kansas over what children should be taught in schools about the origin of life -- was it natural evolution or did God create the world?
The hearings, complete with opposing attorneys and a long list of witnesses, were arranged amid efforts by some Christian groups in Kansas and nationally to reverse the domination of evolutionary theory in the nation's schools.
William Harris, a medical researcher and co-founder of a Kansas group called the Intelligent Design Network, posed the core question about life's beginnings before mapping out why he and other Christians want changes in school curriculum.
School science classes are teaching children that life evolved naturally and randomly, Harris said, arguing that this was in conflict with Biblical teachings that God created life.
"They are offering an answer that may be in conflict with religious views," Harris said in opening the debate. "Part of our overall goal is to remove the bias against religion that is currently in schools. This is a scientific controversy that has powerful religious implications."
Conservative groups are trying to convince state education officials to change guidelines for how evolution theory is taught in science classes at a time when Kansas education authorities are producing new science teaching guidelines.
The hearings -- organized by a committee of the Kansas Board of Education -- were taking place 80 years after the so-called "Monkey Trial" of John Scopes, a Tennessee biology teacher who was found guilty of illegally teaching evolution.
There is renewed debate over evolution in more than a dozen U.S. states and a resurgence across the nation in the influence of religious conservatives, who played an important part in the reelection of Republican President Bush last year.
TEACHERS AND PREACHERS
The Kansas hearing drew a large crowd that included students, teachers and preachers. National and local scientific leaders for the most part boycotted the event.
Pedro Irigonegaray, a lawyer defending evolution in the debate, said he planned to call no witnesses, though he did cross-examine witnesses, sometimes combatively.
Harris acknowledged under questioning that there were many people who saw no incompatibility between religious beliefs that God created life and evolutionary teachings about how life evolved through natural processes.
Outside the hearing room, outraged scientists challenged the validity of the hearings. "This is a showcase trial," said Jack Krebs, vice president for Kansas Citizens for Science. "They have hijacked science and education."
Ken Schmitz, a University of Missouri/Kansas City chemistry professor attending the hearing said he worried that the attack on evolution could confuse students and endanger their ability to excel in science.
"They are not going to understand this," said Schmitz.
Changes to the curriculum proposed by the conservatives would not require inclusion of Biblical beliefs in science classes, also called "creationism" - the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1987 that creationism could not be taught in public schools alongside evolution.
But they would involve questioning the principles of evolution as explanations for the origins of life, the universe and the genetic code. As well, teachers would be encouraged to discuss with students "alternative explanations."
Kansas has been struggling with the issue for years, capturing worldwide attention in 1999 when the state school board voted to downplay Charles Darwin's theory of evolution in science classes.
Subsequent elections altered the membership of the board and led to renewed backing for evolution instruction in 2001. But elections last year gave conservatives a 6-4 majority and the board is now producing new science teaching guidelines.
"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." - George W. Bush State of the Union speech Jan 28, 2003
"mission accomplished" - George W. Bush May 2, 2003
It does not require a majority to prevail but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brushfires in peoples minds". Samuel Adams said that. Pretty deep for a guy that makes beer for a living - The Boondocks
"A conservative is one who admires radicals centuries after they're dead" - Leo C. Rosten
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Quote:
PaulWellr said:
The hearings -- organized by a committee of the Kansas Board of Education -- were taking place 80 years after the so-called "Monkey Trial" of John Scopes, a Tennessee biology teacher who was found guilty of illegally teaching evolution.
In many senses, this should be the case now.
Piltdown Man, Nebraska Man, and Embryonic Recapitulation are being taught in some high schools. Not to mention most teachers characterize evolution as more than just a theory, but also a fact.
Teaching faulty info to impressionable individuals just beginning to learn the [dos and do nots/right and wrongs] of the world should be a crime.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,949
2500+ posts
|
|
2500+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,949 |
Quote:
PaulWellr said:
"They are offering an answer that may be in conflict with religious views," Harris said in opening the debate. "Part of our overall goal is to remove the bias against religion that is currently in schools. This is a scientific controversy that has powerful religious implications."
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I consider myself to be a person of faith, and learning about evolution in school did nothing to challenge my faith. Nor did I see it as an attack on religion. It was presented as "here's the theory of evolution as we know it today." Nobody was trying to tell us that G-d didn't exist or G-d didn't play any part in creation or anything like that. Nor am I aware of this actually happening in a public school setting (especially on a wide-scale basis.)
Quote:
National and local scientific leaders for the most part boycotted the event.
That was a stupid move on their part. How can they support their views if they won't show up to back them up?
In "Inherit The Wind," scientists and evolution experts were not allowed to be called to the witness stand during the trial. Now in real life, they have an opportunity to speak. Why won't they do so?
Quote:
Pedro Irigonegaray, a lawyer defending evolution in the debate, said he planned to call no witnesses, though he did cross-examine witnesses, sometimes combatively.
That doesn't help their cause either.
Quote:
Harris acknowledged under questioning that there were many people who saw no incompatibility between religious beliefs that God created life and evolutionary teachings about how life evolved through natural processes.
I'm glad he's aware of this. So why doesn't he realize that he and others are probably making a bigger deal out of this issue than is necessary?
Quote:
Ken Schmitz, a University of Missouri/Kansas City chemistry professor attending the hearing said he worried that the attack on evolution could confuse students and endanger their ability to excel in science.
"They are not going to understand this," said Schmitz.
That's almost as ridiculous as the idea that learning about evolution could disrupt one's religious convictions.
Quote:
Changes to the curriculum proposed by the conservatives would not require inclusion of Biblical beliefs in science classes, also called "creationism" - the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1987 that creationism could not be taught in public schools alongside evolution.
But they would involve questioning the principles of evolution as explanations for the origins of life, the universe and the genetic code. As well, teachers would be encouraged to discuss with students "alternative explanations."
I don't really have a problem with this. Students should always be encouraged to question and challenge what's being presented to them. Although I'm curious what other options there are besides evolution and creationism.
"Well when I talk to people I don't have to worry about spelling." - wannabuyamonkey
"If Schumacher’s last effort was the final nail in the coffin then Year One would’ve been the crazy guy who stormed the graveyard, dug up the coffin and put a bullet through the franchise’s corpse just to make sure." -- From a review of Darren Aronofsky & Frank Miller's "Batman: Year One" script
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251 |
I'm glad you brought up the John Skopes trial because the primary argument in tat trial was that both sides should be presented so that students could make an infomed decision for themsleves. My how we lose site of such lofty ideals of equality when we find ourselves in the dominant position. Anyway, just keep teh hate coming it does wonders for your cause.
Putting the "fun" back in Fundamentalist Christian Dogma.
" I know God exists because WBAM told me so. " - theory9
JLA brand RACK points = 514k 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 232
200+ posts
|
|
200+ posts
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 232 |
Quote:
wannabuyamonkey said:
I'm glad you brought up the John Skopes trial because the primary argument in tat trial was that both sides should be presented so that students could make an infomed decision for themsleves. My how we lose site of such lofty ideals of equality when we find ourselves in the dominant position. Anyway, just keep teh hate coming it does wonders for your cause.
What's your problem WBAM? I didn't read anything hateful in DK's post nor did i read any agenda. In fact it read as if he took great pains to be fair and neutral. It would help if you adressed just what exactly offended you.
In fact I chose the thread title "inherit the Wind" because that's the name of the play and film of the Scopes trial. So of course it's going to be brought up.
"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." - George W. Bush State of the Union speech Jan 28, 2003
"mission accomplished" - George W. Bush May 2, 2003
It does not require a majority to prevail but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brushfires in peoples minds". Samuel Adams said that. Pretty deep for a guy that makes beer for a living - The Boondocks
"A conservative is one who admires radicals centuries after they're dead" - Leo C. Rosten
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251 |
Quote:
PaulWellr said:
Quote:
wannabuyamonkey said:
I'm glad you brought up the John Skopes trial because the primary argument in tat trial was that both sides should be presented so that students could make an infomed decision for themsleves. My how we lose site of such lofty ideals of equality when we find ourselves in the dominant position. Anyway, just keep teh hate coming it does wonders for your cause.
What's your problem WBAM? I didn't read anything hateful in DK's post nor did i read any agenda. In fact it read as if he took great pains to be fair and neutral. It would help if you adressed just what exactly offended you.
In fact I chose the thread title "inherit the Wind" because that's the name of the play and film of the Scopes trial. So of course it's going to be brought up.
Acctually you're totoally right. It's late and I confused something i read via link and made a mental flip and thought I read it in your post. My mistake, sorry...... seriously.
edited to add: i stand by evything else I said in teh post though.
Last edited by wannabuyamonkey; 2005-05-06 7:45 AM.
Putting the "fun" back in Fundamentalist Christian Dogma.
" I know God exists because WBAM told me so. " - theory9
JLA brand RACK points = 514k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 920
500+ posts
|
|
500+ posts
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 920 |
After having read this thread I went out and bought the movie "inherit the wind". I knew there was a film of this trial out there but I never knew the name and in the past, i was never really motivated to buy something that was pretty much ancient history.
WOWOWOWOW!
I swear that given the times we're living in, this film feels completely contemporary. The same arguments, the same intolerance of divergent ideas, the same disdain of science etc. Well worth buying if only to see how little we've advanced as a society.
Everything is funny as long as it is happening to somebody else. --Will Rogers
"I don't think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees." - George W. Bush
I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would .. try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile. - Condoleeza Rice
Barbara Bush: It's Good Enough for the Poor
To comfort the powerless and make the powerful uncomfortable.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
|
|
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801 |
Quote:
unrestrained id said:
...the same intolerance of divergent ideas...
Could say something. But I won't. Heh. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
And now...time for something really depressing!
12.3.2004
Devolution in America
I thought the question of the origin of species had been settled in favour of Charles Darwin long ago. I was mistaken. A substantial portion of Americans believe it was created in 6 days as described in Genisis. These statistics appeared in the SF Chronicle earlier this week.
In your opinion, is Darwin's theory supported by evidence?
Supported by evidence, 35%
Not supported, 35%
Don't know enough to say, 29%
Which best describes your views of the origin of life?
Man developed with God guiding, 38%
Man developed with no help from God, 13%
God created man in present form, 45%
Source: Gallup Poll, conducted Nov. 7-10. The poll surveyed 1,016 adults; the margin of error is plus or minus 3 percentage points.
Percentage favoring the teaching of creationism
instead of evolution
Overall, 37%
Kerry voters, 24%
Bush voters, 45%
Self-described evangelical Christians, 60%
Source: CBS News poll, conducted Nov. 18-21. The poll surveyed 795 registered voters nationwide; the margin of error is plus or minus 3 percentage points.
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." John Stuart Mill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. Oscar Wilde
He who dies with the most toys is nonetheless dead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,949
2500+ posts
|
|
2500+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,949 |
I have a couple of questions regarding the teaching of Creationism in a public school setting. I apologize if they've been asked and answered before.
First of all, how exactly do you teach Creationism beyond a simple, single sentence? "Humans are the result of an act of G-d/intelligent design." What more is there to say than that?
Also - this is the biggie, in my opinion - whose point of view will Creationism be prsented from? Public schools are attended by Christians of various denominations, Jews , Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, aetheists, and children of various other denominations. Do all these different denominations have the same view of Creationism? If not, will one religion's view of Creationism serve as the basis of teaching Creationism, or will it be looked at from different religious points of view? Or will it be explored from a non-religious point of view?
I'm not trying to be a smart-ass here. I want to understand how supporters of the teaching of Creationism want it to work on a practical level within the classroom.
"Well when I talk to people I don't have to worry about spelling." - wannabuyamonkey
"If Schumacher’s last effort was the final nail in the coffin then Year One would’ve been the crazy guy who stormed the graveyard, dug up the coffin and put a bullet through the franchise’s corpse just to make sure." -- From a review of Darren Aronofsky & Frank Miller's "Batman: Year One" script
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
It's a good question. However, I have another: If we were to confine ourselves from teaching what's more likely through historical credibility as opposed to what's assumed and not proven by any measure, does that sound better than saying "we are a product of intelligent design"? I'm not about to tolerate a secular teaching viewpoint simply for the sake of being secular when evolution, one of the secularist cornerstones, is dominating popular belief. I don't care if religion does slip into play--Whichever it may be--Evolution is misinformation and the only reason people think otherwise is because scientists don't want to have to admit that their existence is a phenomena, let alone of spiritual origins. All the while they say, "there's nothing to prove your assertions except for a few scrawled notes", I say their case is worse since not even scientific study can prove its own flagship(evolution).
My proposal course study that will incorporate both Creationist and Evolutionist views would be less absolute, and more passive:
Living/Sentient Matter's Origin: An Ongoing Search
I think the title's kinda self-explanatory. It makes sure to express that everything said is a THEORETICAL CONCEPT. And with that, there's no credible way anyone can say "evolution is fact man, you're just a Bible-Thumper with his fingers in his ears!" or some shit like that. There will be no biasness. Where the Creationist study will come into play is the assertions put forth by the many people and religions over the centuries. I'm thinking that an in depth analysis of what religous theories are more credible, followed by examples of course, would be more appropriate than simply shelling out to every claim made by every religion. Same with evolution--And hopefully, there will be truthful documentation about the backbone discoveries accorded to evolution's fame (I'm sure we all know what I'm talking about there).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,205
fudge 4000+ posts
|
|
fudge 4000+ posts
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,205 |
Teach both, but in different classes!
 Racks be to MisterJLA
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
No! Same class. If it's seperate classes, there's more opporunity for bias on both the part of students and teachers.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,205
fudge 4000+ posts
|
|
fudge 4000+ posts
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,205 |
Quote:
Pariah said:
No! Same class. If it's seperate classes, there's more opporunity for bias on both the part of students and teachers.
Actually...that's a very good point
Racks be to MisterJLA
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 920
500+ posts
|
|
500+ posts
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 920 |
but would you not expect bias if say, an atheist teacher taught creationism? Wouldn't creationism come out as unequally emphasised (or even mockingly) as say, a Sunday School teacher talking about evolution?
Everything is funny as long as it is happening to somebody else. --Will Rogers
"I don't think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees." - George W. Bush
I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would .. try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile. - Condoleeza Rice
Barbara Bush: It's Good Enough for the Poor
To comfort the powerless and make the powerful uncomfortable.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251 |
Quote:
Captain Sammitch said:
Quote:
unrestrained id said:
...the same intolerance of divergent ideas...
Could say something. But I won't. Heh.
The amazing thing is, it's been said in this thread and for some reason they didn't notice.
Putting the "fun" back in Fundamentalist Christian Dogma.
" I know God exists because WBAM told me so. " - theory9
JLA brand RACK points = 514k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
Quote:
Chant said:
Teach both, but in different classes!
You're on the right track. Creationism is mythology. Evolution is based on scientific observation. It comes under the general heading of biology. If you were to teach them together, which creation myth should be taught? The one that appears in the Old Testament? What about the Hindu creation myth? Or Bhuddist? where I live there are lots of both about and their versions are quite different from the gloomy tale of the ancient Hebrews (who BTW borrowed it from the Summarians).
What about Ancient Celtic myth ? Nordic or Greek or Roman myths? You can't prove anyone of these is more accurate than the other. But they're all interesting stories. They just don't have a basis in science.
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." John Stuart Mill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. Oscar Wilde
He who dies with the most toys is nonetheless dead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 3,342
Peacock Teaser 3000+ posts
|
|
Peacock Teaser 3000+ posts
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 3,342 |
Quote:
Darknight613 said:
Quote:
PaulWellr said:
"They are offering an answer that may be in conflict with religious views," Harris said in opening the debate. "Part of our overall goal is to remove the bias against religion that is currently in schools. This is a scientific controversy that has powerful religious implications."
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I consider myself to be a person of faith, and learning about evolution in school did nothing to challenge my faith. Nor did I see it as an attack on religion. It was presented as "here's the theory of evolution as we know it today." Nobody was trying to tell us that G-d didn't exist or G-d didn't play any part in creation or anything like that. Nor am I aware of this actually happening in a public school setting (especially on a wide-scale basis.)
And...I totally agree...
"You're either lying or stupid."
"I'm stupid! I'm stupid!"
Megatron and Starscream
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Quote:
unrestrained id said:
but would you not expect bias if say, an atheist teacher taught creationism? Wouldn't creationism come out as unequally emphasised (or even mockingly) as say, a Sunday School teacher talking about evolution?
No. Teachers may be allowed to create the course guidelines, but schools would have a set standard of the material the adolesence need to read up on.
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
Creationism is mythology.
That all depends on where you're taking the source. Hindu, Hellenic, and Muslim religions all of the like would be more mythology seeing as how they have little or no historical backing for its claims. Christianity and Judaism, however, have thounsands of years of documentation that's backed up not only by eye witnesses, but also by historians. Creationism isn't any mere "myth" when referencing Christian Doctrine.
Quote:
Evolution is based on scientific observation.
You forgot to include that it's junk science. And I say this with the fact in mind that it hasn't proven anything or even substantiated its claims. Anyone can take a theory and turn it into a scientific field, but that doesn't all of a sudden make it a legitimate science.
Using the term "science" deceptively in the sense that it remains in context with the popular opinion of current times is a bad habit evolutionists and secularists need to break.
Quote:
It comes under the general heading of biology.
In no way has its claims of connection to biology been credible or factual.
Quote:
If you were to teach them together, which creation myth should be taught? The one that appears in the Old Testament? What about the Hindu creation myth? Or Bhuddist? where I live there are lots of both about and their versions are quite different from the gloomy tale of the ancient Hebrews (who BTW borrowed it from the Summarians). What about Ancient Celtic myth ? Nordic or Greek or Roman myths? You can't prove anyone of these is more accurate than the other. But they're all interesting stories. They just don't have a basis in science.
I covered this in my previous post.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,949
2500+ posts
|
|
2500+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,949 |
Quote:
magicjay38 said:where I live there are lots of both about and their versions are quite different from the gloomy tale of the ancient Hebrews (who BTW borrowed it from the Summarians).
 "Gloomy?"
"Well when I talk to people I don't have to worry about spelling." - wannabuyamonkey
"If Schumacher’s last effort was the final nail in the coffin then Year One would’ve been the crazy guy who stormed the graveyard, dug up the coffin and put a bullet through the franchise’s corpse just to make sure." -- From a review of Darren Aronofsky & Frank Miller's "Batman: Year One" script
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
Creationism is mythology.
That all depends on where you're taking the source. Hindu, Hellenic, and Muslim religions all of the like would be more mythology seeing as how they have little or no historical backing for its claims. Christianity and Judaism, however, have thounsands of years of documentation that's backed up not only by eye witnesses, but also by historians. Creationism isn't any mere "myth" when referencing Christian Doctrine
Historical? Who observed or found evidence of God? Your argument is rooted in faith. And that's just fine if your speaking in Church. But you're taking an allegorical story and turning it into fact when no such evidence exists. Further, you want to subject my daughter to prosalytizing of a faith that I don't subscribe to. Not even all Christians believe the myth and I'd wager that you wouldn't find many Jews that believe it either. But what do those Christ killers know anyway!
Do you believe in the Apocolypse as well? I can make a strong case that it occurred circa 70 AD.
Quote:
Evolution is based on scientific observation.
You forgot to include that it's junk science. And I say this with the fact in mind that it hasn't proven anything or even substantiated its claims. Anyone can take a theory and turn it into a scientific field, but that doesn't all of a sudden make it a legitimate science.
Using the term "science" deceptively in the sense that it remains in context with the popular opinion of current times is a bad habit evolutionists and secularists need to break.
Well what the fuck have those paleontologists been diggin' up all this time? And those stupid biologists, observing physical adaptations in small organisms in response to changes in their environments. Why are polar bears only found in places where there's constant snow coverage? Pull your head out of that Bible you've got stuck up your ass and take a look around! Try and think of an explanation for your world that isn't based on the ramblings of some Hebrew nomads 5000 years ago.
BTW Muslims have the same creation myth as you. You're all children of Abraham!
Quote:
It comes under the general heading of biology.
In no way has its claims of connection to biology been credible or factual.
Enough said, Bible Boy
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." John Stuart Mill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. Oscar Wilde
He who dies with the most toys is nonetheless dead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
|
|
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801 |
And any semblance of an original argument or position disappears down the toilet. I love how everyone who thinks for themselves does so in the exact same way. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Your post is filled with typical secularist knee-jerks statements. A testament to the insulting ignorance of popular self-proclaimed "intellecual" culture.
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
Historical? Who observed or found evidence of God? Your argument is rooted in faith.
As far as "found evidence" of God, that goes all the way from Adam and Eve to Elias. As far as "observed evidence", Elijah and one other historian covered the miracles and the Doctrine of the Old Testament. The New Testament miracles and preachings performed by Christ were observed by Josephus, a Jewish historian, along with a Roman historian whose name I also forgot. Trailing further down, the saints had a plethora of documented miracles performed in front of opened crowds. Then we can't forget the dancing of the sun and Marian Apparition, which was attested to by hundreds of people at the turn of the century. Then there was close to million eye-witnesses of Mary appearing above a chapel in Egypt, a happening which was photographically documented. All of these events are alligned with Christian origins.
Quote:
Further, you want to subject my daughter to prosalytizing of a faith that I don't subscribe to.
I told you that the course would be a study on THEORETICAL ORIGINS, meaning, all of these things are something to consider. It wouldn't go so far as to express the practices of faith, but the ideals behind the faith's origins: God's eternal presence.
On another note, I feel sorry for your daughter considering she has to be raised by an ignorant assumptive jerk-wad like you.
Quote:
Not even all Christians believe the myth and I'd wager that you wouldn't find many Jews that believe it either.
Trying to use lapsed Christians'/Jews' apathy is the way of a moron. Just so you know. Technically, anyone who doesn't practice, can't truly be considered apart of that religion now can they?
Quote:
But what do those Christ killers know anyway!
You consider the Jews "Christ killers"? I find that disgusting.
Quote:
Do you believe in the Apocolypse as well?
Yes. Yes I do.
Quote:
I can make a strong case that it occurred circa 70 AD.
I won't stop you.
Quote:
Well what the fuck have those paleontologists been diggin' up all this time? And those stupid biologists, observing physical adaptations in small organisms in response to changes in their environments. Why are polar bears only found in places where there's constant snow coverage? Pull your head out of that Bible you've got stuck up your ass and take a look around! Try and think of an explanation for your world that isn't based on the ramblings of some Hebrew nomads 5000 years ago.
I hate whoring this link so often everytime the subject comes up, but I can't bring myself to argue something ad nauseum when I've already expressed how I feel on the subject as voluminously as I can.
Addressing your more specific statement concerning Natural Selection: Christians do believe in what some of it entails. We do believe that, over time, an organism's more extraneous traits such as skin, hair, fur, etc. do change according to the environment. However, we do not agree with the assertion that the internal structure mutates according to nature's whim. In that area, we're of firm notion that our changes only go as far as adaptation.
Quote:
BTW Muslims have the same creation myth as you. You're all children of Abraham!
It documents the same roots and mentions the Holy Family, but it does not, however, have any scriptural relation to the Testaments. Abraham is a secularly recognized historical figure BTW.
Quote:
Enough said, Bible Boy
*shrug* If you say so.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Quote:
Captain Sammitch said:
And any semblance of an original argument or position disappears down the toilet. I love how everyone who thinks for themselves does so in the exact same way.
Don't blame me!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,949
2500+ posts
|
|
2500+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,949 |
Quote:
magicjay38 said:But what do those Christ killers know anyway!
I'm curious how exactly you mean that remark.
"Well when I talk to people I don't have to worry about spelling." - wannabuyamonkey
"If Schumacher’s last effort was the final nail in the coffin then Year One would’ve been the crazy guy who stormed the graveyard, dug up the coffin and put a bullet through the franchise’s corpse just to make sure." -- From a review of Darren Aronofsky & Frank Miller's "Batman: Year One" script
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 8
1 post
|
|
1 post
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 8 |
Alias?  and didn't Elijah get abducted by E.T.'s? and wouldn't evangelical christians take issue with "Marian" apparitions?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
Quote:
Darknight613 said:
Quote:
magicjay38 said:But what do those Christ killers know anyway!
I'm curious how exactly you mean that remark.
I was being sarcastic. That was a widely held belief by many Christians for a long time.
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." John Stuart Mill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. Oscar Wilde
He who dies with the most toys is nonetheless dead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 2
1 post
|
|
1 post
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,205
fudge 4000+ posts
|
|
fudge 4000+ posts
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,205 |
Quote:
Pariah said:
No! Same class. If it's seperate classes, there's more opporunity for bias on both the part of students and teachers.
But I wonder...would both teachings be given it's opportunity to take a hold in a class which is consistenly pro the opposite?
and that goes both ways
Racks be to MisterJLA
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,949
2500+ posts
|
|
2500+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,949 |
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
Quote:
Darknight613 said:
Quote:
magicjay38 said:But what do those Christ killers know anyway!
I'm curious how exactly you mean that remark.
I was being sarcastic. That was a widely held belief by many Christians for a long time.
Just checking.
"Well when I talk to people I don't have to worry about spelling." - wannabuyamonkey
"If Schumacher’s last effort was the final nail in the coffin then Year One would’ve been the crazy guy who stormed the graveyard, dug up the coffin and put a bullet through the franchise’s corpse just to make sure." -- From a review of Darren Aronofsky & Frank Miller's "Batman: Year One" script
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
|
|
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801 |
I waste my time trying to be a moderate on this board. Pariah and Wonder Boy (wherever he went) are defending a historic position of faith with utter sincerity - and zero tact. Chant is... what the hell are you doing, Chant?  The few reasonable pro-evolution posters who want a casual dialogue of ideas seem to have pissed off to some other thread, leaving behind the rabid radicals who are so insecure in their security in what they think that they've gotta demolish every other idea that might potentially threaten their neatly sorted, non-theistic world. (Notice I said non-theistic, not atheistic - not that none of them believes in God, but that the existence of God isn't even a factor to them.) And just when you think it couldn't get any worse, noobs who happen to be evolutionists show up to parrot all the usual half-assed rhetoric, and more pathetic alt ids show up just to troll this thread into nonexistence. Just in case anyone is wondering what I think, I'll tell you. I think this is yet another hyper-polarized and heavily politicized issue where politicians are eager for votes and special-interest groups are eager for money. Since the middle ground is never profitable in issues like this, everyone's gotta be as far to the left or as far to the right as possible. In the process, they will take advantage of extremists that are already there, be they literalist fundies who can't possibly imagine that God might have employed natural methods in creating everything or the huddle of glorified graduate assistants who are atheists before they are scientists. Nobody's allowed in the middle. If you try to see both sides and work for a compromise, you are either selling out to the pagan materialists that run the scientific community or you're a weak-minded religious fanatic of some sort. But in reality, there are some serious problems with both sides. The Genesis narrative is described in metaphorical language throughout, and isn't even remotely aimed at describing any actual process. Do you really think a people who refused to use the Name of God out of reverence would presume to dictate how He must have created things? The whole point of Genesis is that the world did not get here by chance, and we all have someone to answer to, whether we are willing to believe or not. Genesis tells us why we're here. How we got here is completely and totally inconsequential. On the other hand, there have been a lot of things turned up by good old-fashioned hard science (the kind where you actually get out there and do stuff, not sit around and slap scientific labels on your own speculation), and a lot of them seem to suggest that the earth is really old, that living things change to adapt to their environments, and that a lot of living things that used to be here aren't here anymore. Those things are pretty much established. But for the last half century or more, there have been a lot of people who have noticed that the little bits and pieces of fact turned up by scientific research look a lot like bits and pieces of their own pet theories. There have also been a lot of people who have been eager to make their mark on science but who haven't really done anything of consequence and are left with the option of tendering theories that happen to please the scientific bandwagoners that are handing out grants and research fellowships and Nobel prizes and interviews on Discovery and so on. It's always easier to assemble bits and pieces into a theory when you have your conclusion made from the beginning. And let's face it, God can be a pretty scary variable - a variable that just might upset the tidy, self-sustaining little universe scientists have been cobbling together in their heads for decades. Any theory that rules out the possibility of divine intervention can only mean good things for science. Right? How do you prove that God was or wasn't responsible for creating the universe? How do you prove that evolution is or isn't directed? Such questions are beyond the capacity of science to answer. Obviously, the answers to these questions are vitally important to understanding our purpose and our place in this world. But seriously, how many pages of a science textbook can be filled with them? I feel that the debate should be presented (from a balanced perspective) in detail when discussing the history of science and as a prologue of sorts to any discussion of origin theories. But if faith is presented as something observable, what value does it have? And why do evolutionary scientists insist that the book is closed and their theory is pretty much solid when there's more new stuff to discover every day? Never say never, never say always, and let people decide for themselves what to believe. Just give them enough of both sides that they can make an informed decision.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,949
2500+ posts
|
|
2500+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,949 |
Very well said, and I completely agree on all counts.
"Well when I talk to people I don't have to worry about spelling." - wannabuyamonkey
"If Schumacher’s last effort was the final nail in the coffin then Year One would’ve been the crazy guy who stormed the graveyard, dug up the coffin and put a bullet through the franchise’s corpse just to make sure." -- From a review of Darren Aronofsky & Frank Miller's "Batman: Year One" script
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251 |
I was going to ask you to change the color to something that would be easier to read, because my eyes just can't adjust to that much red text, then I noticed this at the bottom. Quote:
magicjay38 said:
Enough said, Bible Boy
and i realized that I don't want to waste my time reading the body of your text or point our where you're right and where you're drawing assumptions, because it doesn't matter. What assumed was a reasoned scientific argument was acctually just biggoted dribble.
Just a bunch of people who know a little about science, but have convinced themselves they know everything about science, that's what this is.
Putting the "fun" back in Fundamentalist Christian Dogma.
" I know God exists because WBAM told me so. " - theory9
JLA brand RACK points = 514k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
|
|
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801 |
I wouldn't say the noob is very representative. Just mildly irritating.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Quote:
Captain Sammitch said:
Pariah and Wonder Boy (wherever he went) are defending a historic position of faith with utter sincerity - and zero tact.
Zero tact? Clarify.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
I can agree with most of what you said. I don't find that evolution is at all in conflict with my spirituality. But your perspective seems to come from a narrow Judeo-Christian model of the nature of God and the Universe. That's really what the debate is about: One group of people trying to impose there belief system on others. Until recently I was a practicing Christian (Anglican) and quite devout. But there are some that believe my particular flavour of Christianity is all wrong because it sees scripture as metaphorical text. Frankly, I left Christianity because of guilt by association. When you say you're a Christian these days you are immeadiatly associated with nobs like Jerry Foul-well and Pat Robber-tson. I tired of having to explain and argue about it. Then it came to me that here we are in the 21st century fighting about the musings of nomadic Middle Eastern shepards 2000 to 5000 years ago. And I'm not even Middle Eastern! So I looked to my own people for guidance and became a Pagan in the Celtic tradition. Blessed be the Goddess. Evolution is neutral on the question of creation. It's focus is on process not how it all began. It's also a model, a means by which we attempt to understand a complex reality. Does it have flaws? Yes. Is it of predictive value? Yes. By it's very nature as a model it seeks to simplify a complex reality it has assumptions that may not always be correct but that's true of every model . That doesn't render it without value. I'm fine with people believing whatever they want. Just don't try to shove it down my throat! (There are better things you CAN shove down my throat)  P.S. Pagans aren't materialists. It's not us who're driving all those SUV. http://www.witchesway.net/
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." John Stuart Mill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. Oscar Wilde
He who dies with the most toys is nonetheless dead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
Quote:
Darknight613 said:
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
Quote:
Darknight613 said:
Quote:
magicjay38 said:But what do those Christ killers know anyway!
I'm curious how exactly you mean that remark.
I was being sarcastic. That was a widely held belief by many Christians for a long time.
Just checking.
Hey I'm a Pagan. The Xtians were not exactly kind to my people, either. Funny how an institution, the Church, modeled on Imperial Rome behaves in such a similar fashion!
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." John Stuart Mill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. Oscar Wilde
He who dies with the most toys is nonetheless dead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
Quote:
wannabuyamonkey said:
I was going to ask you to change the color to something that would be easier to read, because my eyes just can't adjust to that much red text, then I noticed this at the bottom.
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
Enough said, Bible Boy
and i realized that I don't want to waste my time reading the body of your text or point our where you're right and where you're drawing assumptions, because it doesn't matter. What assumed was a reasoned scientific argument was acctually just biggoted dribble.
Just a bunch of people who know a little about science, but have convinced themselves they know everything about science, that's what this is.
If you didn't read it, how did you get to the last sentence?
If your other posts are an indication I'm not missing much by your lack of commentary.
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." John Stuart Mill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. Oscar Wilde
He who dies with the most toys is nonetheless dead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
But your perspective seems to come from a narrow Judeo-Christian model of the nature of God and the Universe. That's really what the debate is about: One group of people trying to impose there belief system on others.
But what I proposed was an equal exhibition of all theories. Plus, I don't consider my views "narrow". If I had absolutely nothing to say about evolution except, "It's wrong!" you'd prolly be right, but gimme some credit.
Quote:
Until recently I was a practicing Christian (Anglican) and quite devout. But there are some that believe my particular flavour of Christianity is all wrong because it sees scripture as metaphorical text. Frankly, I left Christianity because of guilt by association. When you say you're a Christian these days you are immeadiatly associated with nobs like Jerry Foul-well and Pat Robber-tson. I tired of having to explain and argue about it.
I find that saddening. I, personally, don't feel it prudent to give up on what I believe in simply becase others want to bastardize, misinterpret, and misrepresent what I believe. As far as I'm concerned, it's up to me to rehabilitate popular belief on the grounds of Christianity (that's not to say I'm gonna go out converting people, just enlighten them on what is is they're talking about).
Quote:
Then it came to me that here we are in the 21st century fighting about the musings of nomadic Middle Eastern shepards 2000 to 5000 years ago. And I'm not even Middle Eastern! So I looked to my own people for guidance and became a Pagan in the Celtic tradition. Blessed be the Goddess.
Isn't Celtic Paganism also an ancient practice? And why would the age of a religion have anything to do with your devoutness?
Quote:
By it's very nature as a model it seeks to simplify a complex reality it has assumptions that may not always be correct but that's true of every
model . That doesn't render it without value.
I'm not going out on a limb when I say evolution has failed more times than most any theory that tried/tries to properly model the beginning of our existence and this complex reality.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
Quote:
Pariah said:
Your post is filled with typical secularist knee-jerks statements. A testament to the insulting ignorance of popular self-proclaimed "intellecual" culture.
The Fundy Christians have the market cornered on ignorance
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
Historical? Who observed or found evidence of God? Your argument is rooted in faith.
As far as "found evidence" of God, that goes all the way from Adam and Eve to Elias. As far as "observed evidence", Elijah and one other historian covered the miracles and the Doctrine of the Old Testament. The New Testament miracles and preachings performed by Christ were observed by Josephus, a Jewish historian, along with a Roman historian whose name I also forgot. Trailing further down, the saints had a plethora of documented miracles performed in front of opened crowds. Then we can't forget the dancing of the sun and Marian Apparition, which was attested to by hundreds of people at the turn of the century. Then there was close to million eye-witnesses of Mary appearing above a chapel in Egypt, a happening which was photographically documented. All of these events are alligned with Christian origins.
These are matters of Faith. You have a right to believe anything you want. Bring YOUR cchildren up to believe the same. But when you want to preach it in a non-secular forum like public schools, I object.
Quote:
Further, you want to subject my daughter to prosalytizing of a faith that I don't subscribe to.
I told you that the course would be a study on THEORETICAL ORIGINS, meaning, all of these things are something to consider. It wouldn't go so far as to express the practices of faith, but the ideals behind the faith's origins: God's eternal presence.
Fine. Then teach it in a class on philosophy or comparative religion, not biology.
On another note, I feel sorry for your daughter considering she has to be raised by an ignorant assumptive jerk-wad like you.
You've got me all wrong. I'm very non-judgemental on most things. You seem to have a problem with assumptions. Assumptions are necessary for the study of most things. The question is are they valid, or do they hold true most of the time? BTW, my daughter IS a Christian. I'm not. She also believes in evolution.
Quote:
Not even all Christians believe the myth and I'd wager that you wouldn't find many Jews that believe it either.
Trying to use lapsed Christians'/Jews' apathy is the way of a moron. Just so you know. Technically, anyone who doesn't practice, can't truly be considered apart of that religion now can they?
Not accepting a literalist interpretation of Scripture does not indicate a lapse of anything. It indicates a different interpretation of the same text. Unless yours is the One True Church, as in pre-Vatican II Catholicism. Where's Pope John the XXIII when you need him?
Quote:
But what do those Christ killers know anyway!
You consider the Jews "Christ killers"? I find that disgusting.
Addressed earlier.
Quote:
Do you believe in the Apocolypse as well?
Yes. Yes I do.
Quote:
I can make a strong case that it occurred circa 70 AD.
I won't stop you.
I'm too lazy to write it myself but here's a clip: The full text can be found at: http://www.preterist.org/whatispreterism.asp
Quote:
When will Christ return? This question is relevant, and can be answered by scripture. Jesus seems to have answered it very clearly in these passages (Matt. 10:23; Matt. 16:27,28; Matt. 24:34). Ever wonder why the First Century Christians expected Jesus to come in their lifetime, and where they got this expectation from? Take a look at the extreme sense of imminency in these passages: James 5:8,9; 1 Pet. 4:7; Matt. 10:23; Matt. 16:27,28; Matt. 24:34. These verses have always troubled Bible students, and have been used by liberal theologians to attack the inspiration of Scripture. They reason that these passages were not fulfilled when they were supposed to be (the first century generation), so Jesus and the NT writers failed in their predictions and were therefore not inspired. But these verses point to Christ's coming in some sense in connection with the Fall of Jerusalem at 70 AD. So, Jesus' predictions were fulfilled. He did not fail, nor do we need to engage in theological gymnastics to try to explain-away the seeming delay or postponement of His return. It happened right on schedule. Many knew the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD was important in God's scheme of redemption, but never understood its full significance. It has to do with the consummation of the plan of redemption. The final events of the redemptive drama came to pass in the first century within the apostles' generation (before A.D. 70). Christ's kingdom is here now. Paradise has been restored in Christ (spiritually-speaking). Christ has conquered all His enemies and has given us the Kingdom.
This view offers a much more positive and realistic worldview. It is conservative, consistent, optimistic, responsible and accountable. And it robs us of no motivation for either living the Christian life, or evangelizing the world. In fact, it's the only view which gives us a consistent reason for being constructively involved in making the world a better place for the long-term, unlike the short-term escapist and withdrawal mindset of most futurists.
Bible prophecy absolutely makes sense when approached from this past-fulfillment (preterist) perspective! It puts emphasis on the spiritual nature of God's Kingdom, not on the physical, materialistic, sensual, and sensational. It teaches a realized spiritual salvation in Christ and the Church now, instead of a frustrated hope for a postponed sensually-gratifying paradise way off in the future. It has an optimistic worldview that gets involved, makes a positive difference, and lights a candle, rather than cursing the darkness, longing for a rapture-escape, or retreating from society. It doesn't engage in wild-eyed speculation like futurist views. It's just simple, straight-forward Bible interpretation.
Some of the great theologians and scholars of the last 300 years have suggested the preterist view for consideration, but traditional Christianity was too caught up with the idea that the Pope was the Antichrist or some other such Futurist notion. But that has changed. We are not as gullible now as they were when William Miller, Darby, C. T. Russell, Rutherford, Scofield, Walvoord, and Hal Lindsey came along. A constant barrage of false predictions has made us more wary.
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." John Stuart Mill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. Oscar Wilde
He who dies with the most toys is nonetheless dead.
|
|
|
|
|
