Posted on 08/02/2008 8:44:19 AM PDT by Soliton
don't remember when I first learned about the theory of evolution, but nowadays I find myself reading of it a great deal in the popular press and hearing it discussed in the media. As my daughter enters elementary school, I find myself anxious to discuss with her teachers what they will cover in science class and where in their curriculum they plan to teach evolution. OUR COUNTRY HAS LAWS THAT SEPARATE church and state. Public institutions like schools must be neutral on the subject of religion, as required by the Constitution's First Amendment. Our courts have mandated that creationism is not an appropriate addition to the science curriculum in public schools; yet supporters of intelligent design press to have antievolutionary discussions enter the science classroom. Creationists even advocate that, when leaching evolution, educators should add the disclaimer that it is "just a theory."
Let's consider why all of us as educated persons, scientists and nonseientists alike, should take note of what science is taught - and not taught - in our public schools. In common language, a theory is a guess of sorts. However, in scientific language, a theory is "a set of universal statements that explain some aspect of the natural world... formulated and tested on the basis of evidence, internal consistency, and their explanatory power."1 The theory of evolution meets all of these criteria.
(Excerpt) Read more at redorbit.com ...
No, I don’t think you should, but I think we are a long way off from that. In the meantime, we should allow parents to opt-out of the public school/darwin indoctination system and place their children in the school of their choice.
Please tell me you do not assert this is NOT an article of your faith. This is America, and you have a right to believe in the Faith of Evolution, but should this religion be taught in the public school systems.
I agree, though I don't expect it to happen. I am reminded of C.S.Lewis when he revealed the absurdity of expecting virtue from people who are taught that not virtue exists. "In a sort of ghastly simplicity we remove the organ and demand the function. We make men whithout chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst. We castrate and bid the gelding be fruitful."
The truth of the matter is this: false ideas about Truth lead us to false ideas about life. In many cases, these false ideas give apparent justification for what is immoral behavior If you kill the concept of TRUTH then you can kill any concept of true religion or true morality. Richard Weikart has an excellent explaination of how this happens at a national scale.
I don't reject philosophy, I just don't indulge philosophers.
We don't know that there was nothing before the big bang. There is interesting work being done that suggests our universe came from a preexisting one.
There are many complex organic molecules in space. Two precursor of RNA were found in the Murchison Meteorite.
Ribozymes and riboswitches have been found in nature as predicted by the RNA World Hypothesis
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/chemistry/articles/altman/index.html
It is funny that a creationist would cite causation, because you do not accept that God had a cause.
To say that God created the world is the same as saying I don't know. Define God. How did he do it? When did He do it? What evidence can we test for that will support the God hypothesis? Ultimately God becomes a unsupported philosophical catch all—a universal excuse for everything.
Why is there anything at all rather than nothing? It had to be this way due to the necessity of the laws of physics.
Can't you just teach your children about your views on evolution. Can't they go to Sunday School and learn about creation?
I sent my kids to private schools, thank you, which is why I don’t have to allow self-important busybodies tell me what My kids would have had to study had they gone to government schools.
That is a lie. You need to stop now.
Instead of dealing with what I posted, you went off on a rant (due to a guilty conscience?) and now you can't stop.
I will repost my post that made you squeal and if it fits you so be it, if not then dry up.
Hatred for all things ‘Biblical’ defines the modern Democrat party and their hardcore evolutionist allies.
Both of these groups hate American historical values, and both of these groups worship the Big Government public school monopoly.
The hardcore evolutionist on FR who claim to be small government libertarians are the worst liars of all.
The FR hardcore evolutionists worship Big Government at its very worst (public school monopoly) but claim libertarianism as a convenient, dishonest excuse for the extreme moral liberalism they spew on this conservative forum.
They are all liars of the worst kind.
Genome comparisons prove evolution is trueAnd what is an Atheist's best argument for you always telling the truth?
Cultures reward compliant behavior and punish noncompliant behavior. Lying is mostly injurious to the social contract, so cultures have evolved to view most lying as evil.
Good post.
I really am very boring. My wife and kids have figured me out though.
I don't reject philosophy, I just don't indulge philosophers.
I believe you said in post 108 that you did, but I may have misunderstood. I thought you said that it was a "waste of time."
We don't kow that there was nothing before the big bang. There is interesting work being done that suggests our universe came from a preexisting on.
So you are denying Big Bang, Entropy, the findings of COBE, WMAP, the findins of Wilson and Penais, the findings of Hubbell? Are you asserting the universe has always been? It seems in acutuality, all relevant science points to a beginning. A BEGINNING. But, you don't believe that? What is the scientific objective data which indicates a previous universe?
There are many complex organic molecules in space. Two precursor of RNA were found in the Murchison Meteorite.
You know better than I know that the murchison meteorite does not prove a complex nucleoside or nucleoprotein.
Ribozymes and riboswitches have been found in nature as predicted by the RNA World Hypothesis
I do not assert otherwise. Of Course ribosomes are found in nature. I want to have it explained to me how ribosomes exist in inorganic nature.
It is funny that a creationist would ciete causation, because you do not accept that God had a cause.
Nice try. The Law of Causality says, "Everything that comes to be has a cause." It does not say, "Everything has a cause." Theists do not assert that God was caused. The Bible is clear that God is from everlasting to everlasting. He is uncaused. It is completely consistent. Please answer my question honestly and don't try to throw us such a silly smoke screen. If you had studied your philosophy more you would have known that.
As to your last series of questions...How, when, how to test...My answer to you is....from science, from objective, emperic, hard core science,..It seemingly is a miracle. I can give you no explaination the how (Physics) because science stops at the edge of this time, space, matter, energy continuum we call the universe. God is not part of this universe. He is separate and distinct from the universe. He is not responsive to Cause and Effect like you and I are. If you can expain otherwise, I will listen.
Why is there anything at all rather than nothing? It had to be this way due to the necessity of the laws of physics.
The necessity of the laws of physics? Tell me, which laws of physics bring something out of nothing. The world is waiting for you to make this new finding clear. No doubt you will be a very wealthy man for clarifying this profound assertion. The laws of physics acting on NOTHING to birth the universe. I want to hear this.
Taking “intelligent design” people at face value after they got caught red-handed would be as stupid as taking Clinton at face value after s/he similarly got caught.
There are other models out there, too, but Carroll proposed, and seemed to favor the idea of multi-universes that keep creating “baby” universes. “Our observable universe might not be the whole story,” he said. “If we are part of a bigger multiverse, there is no maximal-entropy equilibrium state and entropy is produced via creation of universes like our own.”
Carroll also discussed new research he and a team of physicists have done, looking at, again, results from WMAP. Carroll and his team say the data shows the universe is “lopsided.”
Measurements from WMAP show that the fluctuations in the microwave background are about 10% stronger on one side of the sky than on the other.
An explanation for this “heavy-on-one-side universe” would be if these fluctuations represented a structure left over from the universe that produced our universe.
http://www.universetoday.com/2008/06/13/thinking-about-time-before-the-big-bang/
This must be an example of that “stream of consciousness” thing they talk about in Literature 101....
Did Bill Clinton teach you the fine art of evasive parsing, or did you teach him?
Actually, the theocons are still Dems (as evidenced by their belief in Big Government). They've merely adopted a convenient political cover identity.
Yep; it’s a good confession that he is indeed guilty of equating people who understand evoultionary biology with “liberals”. That confession will, presumably, be good for his soul (unless he tries to weasel out of it).
Both of these groups hate American historical values, and both of these groups worship the Big Government public school monopoly.
The hardcore evolutionist on FR who claim to be small government libertarians are the worst liars of all.
The FR hardcore evolutionists worship Big Government at its very worst (public school monopoly) but claim libertarianism as a convenient, dishonest excuse for the extreme moral liberalism they spew on this conservative forum.
They are all liars of the worst kind
From the obtuse reactions, it seems you hit a very raw and exposed nerve.
I'll take a stab at that. It's because truth always wins. It can be buried or denied successfully for awhile, but truth wins.
And it's much easier to defend than falsehoods.
So why wouldn't it be the best policy for anyone regardless of religious belief?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.