Forums → WEPR → Evolution, creationism and the school cirriculum
| 697 | 104837 |
Well to start out i dont beleive in evoltuion so the fact that other things cant be taught really ticks me off but i just want to see what people think and why.
- 697 Replies
btw on the real topic what was your answer?
If we keep to the public school system - evolution only. Otherwise, we privatize education and it is something that shouldn't be enforced, but evolution is ideal.
different amounts of pressure due to elevation place indies the world ect.
Diamonds are formed at pressures exceeding 45 kilobars. Source. Water pressure increases by 1 bar for every 33 feet. 45,000 * 33 feet = 1,485,000 feet or approximately 51 Mount Everests stacked on top of each other or 352 kilometers above the roughly 100km high boundary between Earth and outer space. I don't find it likely that Noah would have survived such a celestial voyage.
the coal was in a canyon area and they carbon dated the diamonds it was a study with unbiased scientists to find the age of the earth
Natural topography changes, the peat bog may have dried up or was washed out by a river. Scientists don't Carbon date diamonds, Carbon 14 has a half life of 5,730 years, instead they use ones with radioisotopic inclusions, they use elements such as Uranium 238 or 235, which have half lives of 4,460,000,000 years and 703,803,000 years respectively, these elements were in the diamond since it formed making radioisotopic dating possible.
actauly they've found purely oxidized rocks in all levels of the crust which shows an atmosphere that always contained pure oxygen..
Oxidation can occur when extremely hot lava contacts water. For example, when you burn thermite and it contacts water it explodes. This is because the intense heat separate the hydrogen and oxygen particles allowing thermite's aluminum to react with the oxygen and the displaced hydrogen reacts with external oxygen gas. thus the heated rock can separate the atoms and the oxygen will react with rock. Furthermore, the oxidation cold easily have occurred at a later time due to hydrothermal reactions within the crust.
The best arguement I could give for teaching intelligent design,and not Norse mythology or whatever other theories is mainly for the fact that yes,it does use science to support its theories
But as I pointed out in my earlier post, all ideas have a few facts supporting them- though they may be distorted - and that any religion when trying to prove its idea can "mine" facts that support their theory of creation rather than look to an objective evaluation of facts as science attempts. In a nutshell:
Scientific Method: Religious method:
1)Make observations 1)Formulate a hypothesis
2)Formulate a hypothesis 2)Gather evidence to support it
3)Run tests to prove or 3)Disregard conflicting claims
disprove your hypothesis with said evidence
4)If your hypothesis is 4)Enlightenment
wrong formulate a new one,
if it was not disproved
do more tests to challenge
or qualify it
5)Release findings for
other scientists to
evaluate your hypothesis
I shall supply a few links that all tell different things concerning the topic.
All but one of those links just try to disprove evolution, not prove creationism. II could rebuttal them, but I would rather that you gave specific arguments to look to. The other link just gives two Creationist scientists. I've actually looked at one of Behe's books and it was rather easily refutable (of course the HIV virus has evolved, just look at the genetic changes for the coding of the protein VPU). Also, two scientists isn't comparable to the many supporting evolution.
no it should not, it interferes with my, and a lot of other peoples religions. I never said that nobody believes in it i just think its way too controversal to be taught
Phoo, I'm not going to go through all of the stuff here as I'm too tired and have too much to study.
But on a lighter note, I took one look at this:
I don't find it likely that Noah would have survived such a celestial voyage.
And thought "OMG SCIENTOLOGY!?" xD
no it should not, it interferes with my, and a lot of other peoples religions. I never said that nobody believes in it i just think its way too controversal to be taught
As opposed to your view of creation interfering with others' religions, and my lack of religion?
And the controversial thing made me laugh...if ANYTHING is controversial, it's creationism.
yea, creationism should be taught in schools whether mandatorily or not. The problem is if they only teach evolution which is grounded in science (allegedly), then they don't really have to teach anything else because they can say they only teach factual things, but if they teach creationism people could demand they teach their religion too so they would have tons of religious classes and classes cost money. actually that's how the fling spaghetti monster got started some school taught creationism along with evolution and they got this [url=http://www.venganza.org/about/open-letter/]
i dont really think religion class is a needed subject, because not everyone is of same religion. as to the subject, i dont think they should even teach it because people may have different stand points because of their religion/beliefs.
I think so. And religion should not be even taught in school to controversial.
im all bible..lol big boom hahahaha thats what happens when i poop
The Big Boom Theory is stupid, if that was true, my little brother would be making a heck of a lot of universes
The Big Boom Theory is stupid, if that was true, my little brother would be making a heck of a lot of universes
You're brother is a super-dense celestial cloud that contains all the matter of the universe, and expands all this matter to infinite distances at mind-boggling velocity!?!
[quote]The Big Boom Theory is stupid, if that was true, my little brother would be making a heck of a lot of universes
You're brother is a super-dense celestial cloud that contains all the matter of the universe, and expands all this matter to infinite distances at mind-boggling velocity!?![/quote]
Quite off-topic, but: Imagine that kid having an upset stomach...
i dont really think religion class is a needed subject, because not everyone is of same religion
That is why it is called Religion. You will learn about all major religions. It gives the respect and knowledge about other religions that is needed to understand other people and why they do as they do, and gives the reason why having a religion is not the same as being evil.
Well the difference between science and religion is science is the actually observations made in nature, a theory is simply the conclusion made by observations, while religion is more based on faith, the faith that it is truth...Also I like science because I have air conditioning, Microwave ovens, lol Even the internet was made because of science sooo i dont doubt what the observations made have helped us progress, just imagine less the 100 years ago computers were thought as a useless idea and nuclear power impossible, yet as we progress we technology, and comfort of living we get more complainers hmmm
But you have to remember that science does not contain facts, as it is only theories. Nothing can be proven 100 percent.
Science does contain facts.
A scientific theory is not just a guess, it's as close to proving something as you're going to come, realistically.
And you can't just teach the "major" religions if you're talking about I.D., because it implies that only certain religions' theories are valid enough to be discussed. You would literally have to explain every...single...theory out there, which would be effectively impossible.
You must be logged in to post a reply!