Home Politics & Debate
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

Keep "intelligent design" concept out of science lessons, US judge rules

24

Comments

  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    It also means that you should not rule out "Intelligent Design" just because no-one can prove it happened that way. It's just another theory and, like Hawkings, should be treated that way.


    kids aren't taught hawkings' stuff though, theres all kinds of factors like the 'shape' of the universe, we could prove it by building a super massive triangle and showings its deviation from 180 degrees internal angles total but we cant

    problem is the mathematical side of physics is far ahead of the technology to measure and test it
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I just find it difficult to believe or comprehend that we have no purpose, in fact i wont accept it ! if you think 'hey i am alive, i live for 80 years if i am lucky, and then i die' it just doesnt cut it for me! besides there is nothing wrong with believing in something positive and yeah the whole science thing would make children think more perhaps, but what do you tell a five year old if say their mum or dad died, a scientic equasion isnt going to help much is it!
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    bongbudda wrote:
    Where the big bang came from, what caused it and why are questions which at present (maybe forever) can logically include the possibility of a god of some sort.

    yes why i'd rather kids werent taught at all, the non-god arguments are so complex in word form it'd be impossible for kids at school to hear a rational argument they'd understand



    dogs cant understand relativity or quantum physics, or even maths, does that mean their god done it, nope? it means they just dont know
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    yes why i'd rather kids werent taught at all, the non-god arguments are so complex in word form it'd be impossible for kids at school to hear a rational argument they'd understand



    dogs cant understand relativity or quantum physics, or even maths, does that mean their god done it, nope? it means they just dont know

    Dogs have a god! oh my!? lol
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Dogs have a god! oh my!? lol


    who knows, they might, they might not, not for us to speculate ;)


    seriosuly though teaching a idea because it sounds nice is not what you do? theres already enough crap taught in science at schools :(


    those crappy 8 dot and cross diagram only work for like 4 elements, as well as the basis of covalent bonds, and metallic bonding - they should have left the theoretical chemistry alone at school and taught things like pH and pKa instead and simple reactions
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Well apparently, going off the subject of science completely, animals dont have souls....... scarey!

    And were back..........They have completely took the fun out of science anyway! what ever happened to disecting (?) spelling a frog! animal right perhaps?? or when you would do cool stuff like find out your blood group! science is a blur in my memories....... so sad!
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    yeh but thermodynamics still isnt fully proved, can acurately predict physical properties from concepts that make no sense to me in my 3rd year of doing it :s

    That's the nice thing about science, you can do things wiith it. And when you can't, you change what you are doing. If we were to scientifically test christianity, we could call one man "christ" and then neail him to a tree and see what happens.

    When nothing other than death occurs, we dismiss it.

    I love facts, me.
  • Options
    Teh_GerbilTeh_Gerbil Posts: 13,332 Born on Earth, Raised by The Mix
    Well apparently, going off the subject of science completely, animals dont have souls....... scarey!

    Chances are we don't either? What exactally do you mean by "soul"? Just curious... as we really don't seem to have one.

    A soul is a non-physical non-observable thing.

    That's like me saying a giagantic monset with 12 arms is behind you, it breaths fire, and could devour you at any moment. Oh, and by the way... there is no way for you to tell it is there. At all. Ever.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Teh_Gerbil wrote:
    Chances are we don't either? What exactally do you mean by "soul"? Just curious... as we really don't seem to have one.

    A soul is a non-physical non-observable thing.

    That's like me saying a giagantic monset with 12 arms is behind you, it breaths fire, and could devour you at any moment. Oh, and by the way... there is no way for you to tell it is there. At all. Ever.

    Look at the realist glow! lol

    Well a soul is the immaterial part of a person; the actuating cause of an individual life, like a spirit........... do you believe in ghosts? its the essence of who we are, is it not? our bodies are simply temples, when we die we have no use for them anymore obviously but our soul lives on...........
  • Options
    Teh_GerbilTeh_Gerbil Posts: 13,332 Born on Earth, Raised by The Mix
    Ah, a dualist. How rare...
    I won't point out the flaws, it probably been done before (many times, I do not doubt!). But interesting for you to hold such a position.

    I feel that... how do you think the "soul" exists without body? Do you think mind and soul are the same thing? I just don't think there is much evidence for it. I want to beleive something, thanks to my Christian upbringing, but I fail to see any real reason too. Ghosts, can be easily explained in other terms than someones "soul", and I beleive, when someone REALLY researches, we will find it is probably more time echoes or dimension overlap, or something completley mad suchas.

    "We", I beleive, are beings that gain experience and are shaped by the changing of our brain. Also, your above point... life is not "pointless" because you are not an immortal soul. Life has a point, with or without it. It is to reproduce, and to experience what you can, while you can, and be good and kind to your fellow man, who is hopefully trying to do the same.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Sorry if this sounds stupid but can you believe in ID and not believe in God?

    Anyway, good move...fuck those Americans have their heads up their hole half the time.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Teh_Gerbil wrote:
    Ah, a dualist. How rare...
    I won't point out the flaws, it probably been done before (many times, I do not doubt!). But interesting for you to hold such a position.

    I feel that... how do you think the "soul" exists without body? Do you think mind and soul are the same thing? I just don't think there is much evidence for it. I want to beleive something, thanks to my Christian upbringing, but I fail to see any real reason too. Ghosts, can be easily explained in other terms than someones "soul", and I beleive, when someone REALLY researches, we will find it is probably more time echoes or dimension overlap, or something completley mad suchas.

    "We", I beleive, are beings that gain experience and are shaped by the changing of our brain. Also, your above point... life is not "pointless" because you are not an immortal soul. Life has a point, with or without it. It is to reproduce, and to experience what you can, while you can, and be good and kind to your fellow man, who is hopefully trying to do the same.

    That is quite deep for a 17 year old.......i dont have time to debate you on the soul thing except that ghosts are lost souls........i feel anyway, however, you are right that one of our purposes is to reproduce but answer me this by being kind to your fellow man of whom we hope will do the same.... what do you gain from that and why would you chose to do that, because you have a choice perhaps, free will........ this is something god has given us and we choose how we want to lead our lives and just maybe the way we do live and the choices we make will therefore decide our fate......even if it means having a date with death :p

    Take care Will! he he
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    i dont have time to debate you on the soul thing except that ghosts are lost souls

    I got to here and knew there was no point reading on.

    Lost souls? What are you on about, it's like the Catholic Church saying non-baptized children go to limbo or if you don't repent your sins you'll go to Purgatory. Nonsense.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    turlough wrote:
    Sorry if this sounds stupid but can you believe in ID and not believe in God?
    I guess one could... you could believe that we were created by non-godly beings; for instance an advanced alien civilisation who designed and created us in a lab.

    Who or what created them is another matter though... ;)
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Yea I suppose, there's these theories of us being a simulation but who created them if it's true..hard to get your head round it sometimes :crazyeyes
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    ---
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    But would you say the Koran is nonsense? No chance.
    .

    What the fuck are you rambling on about now. Of course I think the Koran is a load of shite. What makes you think I would excuse it?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    ID but no god?

    Easy.

    The human brain is a creation of intelligent DNA to increase the rate of evolution.

    Design > evolution.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    turlough wrote:
    I got to here and knew there was no point reading on.

    Lost souls? What are you on about, it's like the Catholic Church saying non-baptized children go to limbo or if you don't repent your sins you'll go to Purgatory. Nonsense.

    People who cant accept death perhaps or those that dont want to die, or that they dont even realise they are dead!!! Obviously too deep for your simple brain!
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    or that they dont even realise they are dead!!!

    Not realise that you're dead. Interesting concept.

    I usually don't realise that I've forgotten to put the dishwasher on, or something.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    People who cant accept death perhaps or those that dont want to die, or that they dont even realise they are dead!!! Obviously too deep for your simple brain!

    I think you've forgotten to take your tablets today mate!
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    To suggest something as beautiful as the human body, something as brilliantly designed as the creation and birth of another human, or complex as the oak tree from the tiny seed, was not a creation is mans dusgusting arrogance at its worst.
    and right there is where intelligent design fails to work. People who support intelligent design commonly use the very same argument. The reason that intelligent design can't be taught in a science class is because the scientific process in based on inductive reasoning, where as intelligent design is based in deductive reasoning.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    People who cant accept death perhaps or those that dont want to die, or that they dont even realise they are dead!!! Obviously too deep for your simple brain!
    :confused:

    you've been drink'n too eh? :naughty:
  • Options
    Teh_GerbilTeh_Gerbil Posts: 13,332 Born on Earth, Raised by The Mix
    That is quite deep for a 17 year old.......i dont have time to debate you on the soul thing except that ghosts are lost souls........i feel anyway, however, you are right that one of our purposes is to reproduce but answer me this by being kind to your fellow man of whom we hope will do the same.... what do you gain from that and why would you chose to do that, because you have a choice perhaps, free will........ this is something god has given us and we choose how we want to lead our lives and just maybe the way we do live and the choices we make will therefore decide our fate......even if it means having a date with death :p

    Take care Will! he he

    You gain alot be being a good person - your qaulity of life improves, because you have a good network of reinds and people who like you. You are living a much fuller life than someone who acts like a bastard to everyone - they end up with other bastards and such folk. You can probably see how being with good people is better than not. It would lead to your life being much fuller.

    I don't claim to know what happens after death, myself... I just think... it's going to be the thing i'll find out, when I die. Should be interesting. If their is a God, I can live safe in the knowledge that, I have lead a good life, and he shall be pleased. Unless he is an evil god. Then we're all fucked, anyway. :p

    You take care too, Nameless one.

    Edit: Ooh, I just thought... Lost Souls?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    bongbudda wrote:
    Of course, I made no mention of biology lessons, but, as I said the further back you push it to the start of time the more philosophy and physics merge. There is only theories about where it all came from, and whether you like it or not the idea of a god does fit into that debate.

    Perhaps I am looking at too specific an example, I'm just saying that the distinction between idea's about the creation arent as simple as you are making out.

    I'm not in anyway defending ID, I dont know much about it, its just I have met a couple of people studying higher physics and religion (in its broadest possible meaning) isnt divorced from the debate.

    Aye, but postulating over the origins of existence is suited to a philosophy/religious setting, as opposed to actual science - how can intelligent design be taught as science when it's an unproven hypothesis? You can't actually teach it as science - it should be mentioned as part of science to cover the entire picture and discussed properly as part of philosophy/religious education.

    That's the correct and logical balance.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    turlough wrote:
    What the fuck are you rambling on about now. Of course I think the Koran is a load of shite. What makes you think I would excuse it?

    Because you don't support bombing the Middle East.

    That's how laughable his intellectual faculties are.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    the scientific process in based on inductive reasoning, where as intelligent design is based in deductive reasoning.
    and look where either of 'em got us ...
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    and look where either of 'em got us ...
    well damn, aint you just a beam of sunshine today! :p
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Spliffie wrote:
    Aye, but postulating over the origins of existence is suited to a philosophy/religious setting, as opposed to actual science - how can intelligent design be taught as science when it's an unproven hypothesis? You can't actually teach it as science - it should be mentioned as part of science to cover the entire picture and discussed properly as part of philosophy/religious education.

    That's the correct and logical balance.

    But I wasnt suggesting that we do teach ID to kids, I was just pointing out to Aladdin that you can not totally divorce the idea of a 'creator' or creating force from science, however much he would like to dismiss anyone who believes in a god as a nut.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    bongbudda wrote:
    But I wasnt suggesting that we do teach ID to kids, I was just pointing out to Aladdin that you can not totally divorce the idea of a 'creator' or creating force from science, however much he would like to dismiss anyone who believes in a god as a nut.


    yeh it's more of a philosophical question, but it's not even a scientific theory - so shouldn't be taught in schools in science classes, i'm happy to admit people have their own views on things, BUT evolution as people think 'survival of the fittest' isn't the only idea about how things evolve over time - however the intelligent design promoters tend to use the lack of proof argument to justify their 'IDEA' just as creationists do, and many ID books used to refer to creationism loads, then relabelled it intelligent design afterwards......

    http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn8498
    The suit was filed after the Dover school board told teachers to read a statement to high school biology students that said, among other things, that the evolution was a theory, not a fact, and that intelligent design was a competing explanation.

    The statement encouraged students to keep "an open mind" and referred them an intelligent design book called "Of Pandas and People". After science teachers refused to read the statement, administrators read it to students instead.
    In reaching the decision, Judge Jones relied heavily on the history of the writing of "Of Pandas and People". The book was first published in 1989, just two years after the Supreme Court ruled against creation science. He found that early drafts of the book referred heavily to creationism and creation science.

    But sometime after the 1987 decision, references to creation and creationism were replaced throughout the book by references to intelligent design – about 150 times in all.

    "The overwhelming evidence at trial established that intelligent design is a religious view, a mere re-labelling of creationism, and not a scientific theory," he wrote.

    and wow there's some judges with some sense of logic
    He says that the examples offered by intelligent designers, such as the immune system and the blood clotting process, do in fact have natural explanations. But even if they did not, that would merely be an argument against evolution, not necessarily for intelligent design



    and there's some things on its reckon humans evolved, which actually involved some real study
    http://www.newscientist.com/channel/life/evolution/dn7539
    http://www.newscientist.com/channel/life/evolution/mg18524875.200




    and personally i have no idea where or what we come from, but i think aliens planted life on this planet :lol:
Sign In or Register to comment.