|
Creation vs Evolution (pg. 27)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| DrUg_Tit0 |
Kinda correlated to this story, a sad news from Serbia...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3635794.stm
That's what happens when you give a minor right party member to be a minister of education. Hopefully, the public protest will force the government to pull back on that decision. What fascinates me about the story, though, is that Serbia is a pretty atheistic country... |
|
|
| igottaknow |
| quote: | Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0
Kinda correlated to this story, a sad news from Serbia...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3635794.stm
That's what happens when you give a minor right party member to be a minister of education. Hopefully, the public protest will force the government to pull back on that decision. What fascinates me about the story, though, is that Serbia is a pretty atheistic country... |
The scary thing is this same sort of arm twisting is occurring in the US.
| quote: | | Gallup poll shows U.S. still split over evolution. The results of the most recent survey reveal a nation still torn over the issue of human evolution. A majority (57 percent) of Americans choose "creationism" over "evolution" when asked which term best describes human origins... In the 20 years that Gallup has run the same survey, public opinion has changed little. |
| quote: | Under the Kansas order, local school districts will decide for themselves what is -- or isn't -- taught about evolution and the big-bang theory.
But critics of the new standards worry that some schools won't include those subjects because they no longer will be covered on standardized tests given to Kansas students. A U.S. dilemma While the Kansas controversy has drawn most recent attention, the creationist position seems to have wide support nationwide.
A CNN-USA Today-Gallup poll found that 68 percent of those surveyed favored teaching creationism along with evolution in public schools; 40 percent favored dropping evolution altogether and teaching children only the biblical version of creation.
The findings, though, are not necessarily a trend. Developments from around the United States following the Kansas decision in August show varying approaches to creationist-evolutionist controversy and how it should be addressed in classrooms:
In August, the Kansas Board of Education voted to drop evolutionary theories from the state's science standards
• The Arizona legislature is considering a measure that would require teachers to present scientific evidence that both supports and discredits the theory of evolution.
• Oklahoma Attorney General Drew Edmondson ruled last month that a state committee had no authority to require that biology textbooks carry a disclaimer saying evolution is a "controversial theory." The committee said the disclaimer, adopted in November, was added because biology texts do not devote enough space to alternate explanations of how life began.
• A poll of West Virginians released last month found that most people would like more biblically oriented teaching in public schools. A majority (57 percent) said the biblical account of creation is more likely to be the "actual explanation for the origin of human life on earth," while 9 percent selected evolution. Thirty percent said it is most likely that "both are true," while 4 percent were undecided and less than 1 percent said neither is true.
• In Kanawha County, West Virginia, where a policy banning the teaching of "creation science" was approved in 1987, a resolution to reverse the ban was defeated by the school board last December. The measure would have allowed teachers to use their classrooms to challenge theories of evolution.
• Last October, Kentucky's education department deleted the word "evolution" from its standards, replacing it with "change over time." |
|
|
|
| Seventil |
| quote: | Originally posted by MisterOpus1
*ahem*
Uh, Seventil, sorry to intervene here, but I'm kinda wonderin', are you really asking Tiesto14 these questions, even though we've thoroughly discussed 4 out of 5 of these already?
|
Opus - glad you are back. ;)
Yes, myself and you have agreed on all of your points.
However, tiesto14 doesn't have a fair grasp on evolutionary theory (which he's demonstrated). I merely pointed those out so he would actually read the argument (the rebuttals by talkorigins and trueorigin).
My goal was to simply educate him. While you and I have come to an agreement of sorts, tiesto14 was backtracking a bit.
So, no offense ;) -- While I do believe that most of the claims against my "five disproves of evolution" (except the abiogenesis one which I agree, evolutionary theory does not state) - use a disposition toward their philosphy (neo-Darwinism) to prove them wrong. This, however, is simply my view and I respect and see where you have been coming from.
While I don't agree with djveren's colorful language being used - he does have a point about some of the plain ignorance that has filled this thread with absence of yourself (Opus), occrider and Arbiter. |
|
|
| Seventil |
| quote: | Originally posted by MisterOpus1
Do you find repeating old claims, creating straw men, misunderstanding evolution (at least in part), and quote mining from various sources that have blatantly taken researchers' statements out of context, a logical argument?
I fear. I really do.
Hmmm, pointing out the logical fallacies, explaining in great detail what exactly evolution is and isn't,
ah hell, each to his/her own I guess.
Are you really an evolutionist? Just out of curiousity, what is your education level?
For a supposed "evolutionist", you really seem not to have a very firm grasp of what evolution is, and the theories that comprise it.
Regardless, explain in detail what theories exactly you consider "bul".
If I didn't know any better, I'd say you're an undercover spy creationist posing as an evolutionist!
***starts Mission Impossible music***
You do realize that theories are subject to change as technology and new data arise, don't you? You do realize that this is the very essence of science, right?
Boy, I'd venture to guess that you rather stink as an "evolutionist" so far. You really should read up a little more on your supposed line of science. |
Hey! Leave my fan club alone! It's like 15 against 1 in here. ;)
Hehe... mission impossible music.
Opus, I would like to take this opportunity to thank you again for changing my point of view from a crusade against evolution to a crusade against distorting evolutionary theory to disprove religion. I mentioned this earlier, and you didn't comment, which I took as you either not seeing it or not caring. Either way... thanks. Heh. |
|
|
| Seventil |
| quote: | Originally posted by igottaknow
I'm sorry but I can't help laugh at the detailed scientific replies by you guys. Seventil and for that matter most creationists aren't interested in fact based arguments. Scientific findings and theories are merely a resource that modern creationist cherry pick from to create a pseudo science that supports the bible.
Creationist tactics remind me of mud slinging political campaigns whose purpose is to discredit the opposition while leaving the false impression that their cause is creditable. Responding to their attacks plays into their hands by putting you on the defensive and giving them equal footing. It's unrealistic to think you can have an intelligent discussion with someone who believes in a propaganda based belief system.
Even I was lured into this discussion because it seemed easy enough to disprove these idiotic claims. I'm also troubled by the growing movement of creationist who are trying to prevent the teaching of evolution in school. Its a disturbing trend of the church trying to meddle in science and education, that needs to be met with vocal opposition from we who value logical thinking. Just look at Middle Eastern countries that have allowed religion to dictate the curriculum in education. Creationism share a similar ideology as Islamic Fundamentalist who reject modernization and desire to return to backward thinking of biblical times. |
I appreciate you stereotyping me. I, for one, am fascinated by science. I don't believe I've ever mentioned a dislike for scientific discoveries or theories. I might have a problem when some discoveries are thrown out due to a philosphical standpoint (not fitting in with evolutionary theory) - but oh well, nothing can be perfect, right?
My true love is for physics and astronomy, specifically quantum physics.
So, I take offense to your idiotic claims to know me. Piss off.
Cheers. ;) |
|
|
| tiesto14 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Seventil
Opus - glad you are back. ;)
Yes, myself and you have agreed on all of your points.
However, tiesto14 doesn't have a fair grasp on evolutionary theory (which he's demonstrated). I merely pointed those out so he would actually read the argument (the rebuttals by talkorigins and trueorigin). |
Where did i demonstrate that?...please point it out.
| quote: | Originally posted by Seventil
My goal was to simply educate him. |
Educate me?...I have read Darwin, Behe, Johnson, Miller, Stenger, Hawking, Lederman and Dawkins. I may not express my arguement as eloquent (sp?) as others here...but i have read my fair share and feel i have a strong grasp of The Big Bang theory and evolution vs creation.
I was about to answer your 5 questions, which i pointed out where elementary creationists arguements (look in previous post) but others did it before me.
Your arguements are dated and quite mundane. I respected you until you CLAIMED you where the teacher and i was the uneducated student. I find that to be an insult , being i did not even answer your questions before other stepped in.
| quote: | | Originally posted by Seventil While I don't agree with djveren's colorful language being used - he does have a point about some of the plain ignorance that has filled this thread with absence of yourself (Opus), occrider and Arbiter. |
Again i ask..please post what i stated that was ignorant!!
Is it because i asked common sense questions instead of complex questions? Well that is because more often then not common sense wins.
Funny thing is that you are so fierce towards igottaknow and myself, yet when Opus, OCC and Tito jump in you back down and kiss their asses because you KNOW they will tear every one of your arguements to shreds. Yet you dont know me and figure i am a n00b and decide to try and pass your elitist rhetoric off on me (typical bible hugging creationist bull)...too bad they came in...i would love to of answered your questions to shut you up.
Whatever...:rolleyes: |
|
|
| igottaknow |
| quote: | Originally posted by tiesto14
Funny thing is that you are so fierce towards igottaknow and myself, yet when Opus, OCC and Tito jump in you back down and kiss their asses |
I think he must be infatuated with them, weird I thought this was a debate not a popularity contest. This thread has the feeling of an argument with an 8 year old. I wish I could say I'm insulted but in order for that to happen I would have take the other person seriously. |
|
|
| DrUg_Tit0 |
| quote: | Originally posted by igottaknow
I think he must be infatuated with them, weird I thought this was a debate not a popularity contest. |
That's just sour grapes because we're cooler than you two guys :p |
|
|
| MisterOpus1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0
That's just sour grapes because we're cooler than you two guys :p |
Waaaaaay cooler.
igottaknow, tiesto14, think of The Fonze from Happy Days. Think for a moment just how cool he was.
Then multiply it x100.
We're still much cooler.
igottaknow, tiesto14, think of Rambo. Think for a moment just how cool he was blowin' up all them bad guys.
Then multiply it x1000
You're not even close to how cool we are.
You get my drift? No need to even "try" to be on our coolness level. You just can't reach it. Just be yourselves.
Someday, in the far distant future, you may reach 1/2 of our level of coolness.
Ok I'm done. Sorry. |
|
|
| igottaknow |
were not worthy
*bows and backs away*
:stongue: |
|
|
| Moongoose |
Wow you guys are sooo cooool :D
Bunt Fonzie was way cooler than rambo dont ever forget that :D
BTW im suprised that creationism is spreading in the balkans :eek: Serbia was one ofthe last palces i expected that to happen, most...well all of the people i know from there are not big fans of religion. And i thought our goverment was being stupid by almost allowing the church to put christianity as a mandatory subject in primary schools :rolleyes: |
|
|
| tiesto14 |
you guys should start the
"The Well Educated Elite Tranceaddict Allaince" aka "TWEEKA"
and maybe, just maybe, we can be your disciples.:crazy: |
|
|
|
|
