If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Faith school controversy
This discussion has been closed.
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
Answer this to yourself and be honest. No need to tell anyone else. If I had posted from Wiki supporting your line of reasoning, would you have dismissed it like this?
Blagsta thinks with his feelings. I don't.
I could post another two dozen links outlining what the scientific method is, what it isn't and then measure all those definitions against ID and it would still get debunked. ID isn't science. Sorry to be the one to tell you.
Enjoy your birthday, Kentish. :birthday:
Isn't that pretty much what happens already? Evolution was mentioned and discussed in passing (although I don't believe it was part of the curriculum), creationism was taught objectively in religious education.
theres varying forms of evolution theory, darwinian is only 1, and theres people who believe that evolution happens its just god making alterations as things happen
evolution is currebtly the only tangeable scientific theory for the development of modern species - how life came about has a few,like that bacteria came on a rock of some sort to this planet etc etc
relativity is only a theory however it has a mathematical reasoning behind it and strangely theres circumstances where quantum physics works better however the overall message is that you teach a topic in the appropiate context
ID isnt a scientific theory (if you know the process of how something is a theory) - id is just a really VAGUE hypothesis with no evidence to support it
As opposed to you who makes wild assertions and then completely fails to back them up you mean?
You didn't read the link did you?
The article was in a different journal, but was mentioned in a Nature article.
There have never been any ID papers in Nature as far as I can tell, just lots of papers discussing what bollocks it is.............
You probably were.........
In an RE class rather than a science class though.............
Regardless of what you believe, that's just not fair.
they will all take up the correct positions according to a diagram ...or set of instructions.
one part of the brain will be wired and programmed for music appreciation.
another part will be wired up for recieving and interpreting the light pulses coming through the eyes or self cleaning auto focusing cameras ...
there are more connections in a human brain than the entire communications network of the planet.
there are circuits and micro circuits.
everything precisely placed in a bewildering complexity.
and then comes the cerebral cortex!!!!!!!!!!
quarter of an inch thinck and highly folded and compact.
opened up it would measure about three square feet ...every square inch packed with ten thousand miles of connecting fibre.
while that brain was being put together chemicaly and electricaly ...all very precise and complex and according to a written out diagram ...
billions of other cells were being manufactured ...cells which form bone ...celss that absorb oxygen ...a myriad of extremely important valves each in the right place and flowing in the right direction.
cells for hair eyes coulour vision ...cells to build an audio translation unit which picks up vibrations from the outside world.
connected in a big way to another part of the brain which deals with language.
the most complex thing yet discovered in the known universe is the human brain ...which amazingly ...produces thoughts and feelings!
some of you think it scientific to believe these written diagrams with all their complexity ...could have evolved by chance from a boulder.
science shows such complexity cannot happen by chance ...it just doesn't never has and never will....
such complexities that are being discovered surely debunk all idea of any nineteenth century theory ...which knew nothing of these things.
such complexities should be scientificaly investigated as to ...who ...could possibly have written down these things?
set these things in motion?
inteligent design ...based on twentieth and twenty first century understanding and technology.
we have come a very long way since the eighteenth century.
things that were simply fluids and solids and gasses and pumps and filters making up man ...have now been taken to pieces like never before.
when you start to delve into eighteenth century gooey bits with modern technology ...what do we find ...digital encoding ...wiring diagrams ...each cell being a manufacturing plant ...with transport controls and entry and exit control.
we find fighting machines and building and repair teams in our blood.
all complex ...all wired and programmed according to a diagram.
the closer we look the more amazed we become!
but somehow ...cave man like ...millions of people go into religous mode ...their faith in the impossible ...in the unproven and downright ridiculous
goes against every science we have ...
'duh man ...there was a big flash of light in a big bowl of soup ... and it was written and it came to pass ...the code of life'. your faith is very strong if you believe we accidently came from boulders.
Search results form nature
i haven't looked exhaustivley but i can't see any peer reviewed appers advocating ID there, maybe you can find them as you are so cetrtian they exist?
I suggest you actually read up on the philosophy of science and the scientific method and then come back to us.
Actually, science shows the exact opposite - the universe is ruled by chance.
Good response. Read up on quantum physics sometime, emergent properties, evolution, genetics etc.
unless of course we take a listen to the biblical view which says ...god had no begining.
as difficult as this concept sounds even evolutionists ...cos of the struggle with absolutely nothing ...no matter no energy no space no time ...going bang in a big way and creating all of this becoming ever more impossible to accept ...many are now thinking along similar lines to the biblical ...though they would be loath to admit or even recognise it ....by saying that maybe the universe had no begining ...it has just always been ...an endless series of big bangs and collapses ...like breathing.
chance and accident do not build design and replicate complex mechanisms.
or do you know of some kind of lab experiments than can show this?
repeat these things?
Is it really that tricky a concept to grasp? Simple organisms and structures evolve into more complex ones. Can't really understand what the problem is...
It is infinitely more plausible to me than a deity of sorts creating life and the universe for no apparent reason and then pissing off never to be seen or heard from again.
Plus, of course, there is countless amount of research and scientific evidence to back up evolution (even if there are "holes", i. e. not 100% of it has been backed up with proof yet), whereas there has never in history been even the tiniest amount of anything resembling evidence to back up creationism, 'intelligent design' or even the very existence of God. Something people have been claiming for millennia and yet been unable to provide any proof whatsoever of. Ever.
I know which one of the two schools of thought is in desperate need to provide the world with some evidence. Any evidence.
ETA: Sorry, I keep forgetting. Religious beliefs only require 'faith'... they're beyond evidence...
Yeah they do, given enough time, like billions and billions of years.
So you're happy to advocate a theory why one ste of intelligence (us) MUST have been created by a God but then feel equally happy handing out some vague bullshit about where God came from..........
i made reference to the biblical explanation of where did the original inteligence come from because v...i have no other answer.
there are millions upon millions of fosils available for study ...not one of which supports evolution.
the billions of years bit always strikes me as a bit of a cop out.
we have many examples of insects millions of years old ...preserved in amber ...they are exactly the same as modern insects.
where is the evidence to support the theory of evolution?
seeing as so many people seem to be convinced it is a truth ...where is the evidence?
my evidence is all around me.
if you find a pice of pottery in the ground ...you know someone designed and manufactured it.
find something extremely technicaal and complex ...it just happened!
doesn't make sense and is very iunscientific.
Watch a nature programme. You will see countless pieces of evidence for evolution, from jellyfish that live in a coastal lake that got separated and sealed from the sea 10,000 years ago losing their tentacles (because they're no longer needed) and adapting to the new conditions, to plants that have copied the appearance of neighbouring poisonous varieties to fool potential predators from eating them, to the millions of different variations of land species that have adapted and evolved to be best suited for the conditions of their local environment, etc etc etc ad infinitum.
How could anyone possibly deny that species evolve and change to suit their environment? :banghead:
You need to look no further than the human species. How do you think we've come to have black and white races, to name but two? Surely nothing to do with climatic conditions? Oh no, that's too far fetched...
Actually it does make a lot of sense once you know how it happened, and it is very scientific. Your argument on the other hand comes across as rather simplistic. "Something I don't understand how it came to be? It must be God's work. Phew! That's a rest on the mind..."
But your arguemtn is that something complex can't be arrived at by chance, it must have been designed in some way, yes?
But where did the designer come from, surely that requires explantion and it justs leads to infinite regress...........
You're on about the difference between micro-evolution (that is, adaptation within a species) and macro-evolution (the creation of a new species from another).
2. Where did the material required for evolution come from?
And I think there are plenty of examples out there that can safely be described as evolved, not micro-evolved. It is a moot point in any case, since it is already proven without reproach that species can evolve.