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
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
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
Amen (or the Darwin equivalent
One doesn't need to be in possession of all the answers to know a completely unscientific argument when it's presented.
How about if we went further and we started to send DVD packs to religious lessons putting a few alternative ideas forward to pupils?
I think we ought to.
Interesting and balanced piece on one of the most central arguements between the different theortical positions - The Whale's Leg - or the problems in the transition from sea to land and back to sea, and the apparent lack of transitional animals.
And goes a long way in showing just how critical the scientific community actually are of Darwin - even when he gets things right by fluke. After all remember most Scientists aim to dispprove and alter each other's theories, otherwise they'd just be lab assistants.
https://listserv.umd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0510b&L=ecolog-l&P=6664
exactly
that's science, of course there's massive flaws in darwin's work, but evolution as a general theory is quite good at explaining most things around us, for example bacteria, weeds and how they develop resistance to chemicals - most mutations are negative, very few are positive so generally the best way from what i've read, that we have a massive species 'pool' is that it's the mass extinctions which allow one species to spread apart to enhance their genetic differences
humans have been around for so little time, of course we don't know everything, the problem iwth an intelligent designer argument, is that if were to show it, what does it tell you? to stop trying to understand it and put up and shut up?
then there's the problem of testing for design, when scientifically you would never prove it either way, much like the existence of a god, or of heaven, or of all the greek gods and demi gods, or flying spagetti monsters! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster
It's the same as something like maths. When you want to teach a child addition, it doesn't matter whether you use 4+5 or 5+6 but it has to be a mathematical question that the child can use their new-found skills to answer, or you're not teaching them anything.
I think you interpreted GWST`s post far differently than I.
exactly what I was trying to get at :yes:
oh, on a vaguely related note: here's a good (very long) video: Richard Dawkins reads excerpts from The God Delusion and answers questions at Randolph-Macon Woman's College in Lynchburg, Virginia on October 23, 2006. This Q&A features many questions from Jerry Falwell's Liberty "University" students.
more concerned with the origin of morality, but the main point is he is an atheist/darwinist and is good at debating with a predominately christian audience. here
I don't see why people are so upset. If evolutionism is so blatantly the answer, then the science will stand up to scrutiny and will stand up against other theories. I don't see why it should be such a sacred cow. It is the duty of teachers to provide more than one scientific viewpoint.
My physics teacher was a born-again Christian and it didn't harm my education to have his viewpoint presented to me too- it helped me consider the facts laid before me by scientists.
because the people promoting it are promoting an agenda, they get slated in real scientific press in the sense of the fact they ignore the majority of cases where evolutionary theory has helped a lot
ID doesnt help anywehre, other than in a philosophical debate, of which i would love to be done in a scenario like that as it is a good way of discussing things lke that
nope it has everything to do with it sadly enough
i think we should polythetic relgiions in science also if you can teach ID, why be unfair to those who believe in roman and greek gods
If the Church gains a right to infiltrate science lessons, then everybody else also does.
How fun and educational will science lessons become...
But yes, sticking to this case, I don't see why Creationism and the Christian view of how the Earth and life on it was created should take any precedence over anything else. If we must allow non-scientific beliefs to infilitrate science lessons (and I think that would be a fucking abomination) then we should allow for all other known claims and beliefs.
When ID is a in serious academic journals on a significant scale (which I doubt it ever will) then it can be in a science text book, before then, No.....
I don't see it like that. Currently one theory is taught as absolutely unquestionable fact - and it's not. I don't think we should substitute it with another unproven theory that lacks empirical evidence. Both theories are indisputably popular strands of thought, even within the scientific community beliefs in both theories exist. I think lessons should reflect the differences in opinion and cover both theories - and importantly, the criticisms of both. Education should promote enquiring minds and critical thinking and when it does fears of children being 'brainwashed' by either side are baseless.
Evolution would simply be taught as what is our best understandin given the current state of knowledge, as is every other scientific theory........
An obvious flaw with ID being 'scientific' is that for the vast majority of its proponents, even if the scientific evidence clearly pointed to evolution incontrovertibly, they would still believe in God..............
On a side note, there is one fundamental difference between Intelligent Design and Evolution - Evolution expressly removes the possibility of intelligence - it's a hit and miss process with no overarching meaning or purpose based on random chance and mutation. Intelligent design implies a continued development based on a specific plan for all eternity - something that the vast number of extinctions and dreadful negative mutations don't seem to suggest as possible.
And the Royal Society aren't pushing an agenda?
Evolution is not fact, it is conjecture. Big Bang theory is not fact, it is just conjecture. It should be taught as a theory, with the relevant pros and cons pointed out.
If a science teacher wishes to discuss the merits and problems with the Pastafarian theory, then that's fine. I imagine it would be a very short lesson. I wouldn't object to it.
Evolution shouldn't be such a sacred cow, it should be put open to enquiring minds, just as ID should be, just as creationism should be. There is a significant body of scientists who do believe in creationism- my physics teacher was one of them- and I don't see why their ideas should be barred from the classroom because the secular mafia don't like it.
JimV- the national curriculum expressly states that evolution should be taught as fact.
No one is saying a religious belief shouldn't be tought. The issue is that why should Chrisitanity be taught as science and Islam, Bhuddism and Scientology not be?
Scientologists have a theory about the universe with exactly the same basis in fact as intelligent design. They believe - a space giant named Xenu enslaved the other member's of the giant interstellar alliance, had their souls frozen then dropped in a volcano in Hawaii - which released their souls so they had to be caught in giant soul catchers then attached the souls of cavemen, which now causes depression.
Most countries recognise Scientology as a religion - but I don't believe that it should be taught as SCIENCE, I believe it should be discussed as RELIGION and an issue of faith.
Science lessons however should be devoted to science. Creationism/ID however are not science- something that all of you who would like to see such creeds enter science lessons keep forgetting.
Bringing religious beliefs into science lessons is wrong- and I suspect deep down you all know it. There is a place for religious dogma. And it isn't at science lessons.