Replies

Mr. Blueman,

Again I will say this, PROVE to me that god exists, or prove to me that god does NOT exist.

You cannot do either of those things. Therefore God is not a scientific subject, it is religious or philisophical subject.

I will not tell you that god does not exist, because I do NOT know if he does or not. But again, it is NOT scientific.

Now Dr. Frank,

I would much rather have a science class begin with the definition of theory, therefore the students understand from the get go what a theory is and why it is reasonable to question it in a scientific context. This I believe should be the MAIN beginning of ANY science course. A disclaimer about evolution is both unfair and unnecessary. All scientific theories should therefore have that disclamier. By having the class begin with the TRUE definition of "theory" would be the BEST way to please everyone, as far as I am concerned.

Creationists on the other hand will not go for this, because it must be a written disclaimer specifically aimed at evolution. Because of course they do NOT believe in evolution and therefore do not want anyone else to either.

But, then again, there are some reasonable creationists who would see this as not only a fair way, but a very reasonable one. Mr. Blueman above does not fit into this category.

I would much rather have a science class begin with the definition of theory, therefore the students understand from the get go what a theory is and why it is reasonable to question it in a scientific context. This I believe should be the MAIN beginning of ANY science course. A disclaimer about evolution is both unfair and unnecessary. All scientific theories should therefore have that disclamier. By having the class begin with the TRUE definition of "theory" would be the BEST way to please everyone, as far as I am concerned.

Worth repeating.

Sounds OK to me.

A disclaimer about evolution is both unfair

"UNFAIR"? What the HELL does THIS kind of consideration have to do with anything?

This isn't a sports competition! This isn't the Evolutionist Team against the Creationist Team! For pete's sake man, grow UP. "UNFAIR" to say a TRUE STATEMENT????

I am interested in TRUTH versus FALSEHOOD. "Fairness" or lack thereof has got nothing to do with it, and DOES NOT BELONG in a scientific discussion.

and unnecessary.

Like I said in earlier posts, it's certainly necessary (or at least arguably so) since so many people don't seem to know that "evolution" is a theory.

Lots of people don't know the truth. To tell them "evolution is a theory" would help them know the truth. That's what school is for... I always thought.

(Of course that was all before you enlightened me that it's really some kind of stupid competition and the main consideration is to be "fair"....)

All scientific theories should therefore have that disclamier.

I've got no problem with that.

Creationists on the other hand will not go for this,

I don't know who are these "creationists" whereof you speak who will not go for placing "it's a theory" disclaimers in front of theories, but (if they exist) I disagree with them. Like I said, I've got no problem with putting such disclaimers. I think it's a grand idea.

Creationists on the other hand will not go for this, because it must be a written disclaimer specifically aimed at evolution. Because of course they do NOT believe in evolution and therefore do not want anyone else to either.

The disclaimer, as you no doubt realize, is not an attempt to explain the role of theory in science but to capitalize upon ignorance of that very thing. The disclaimer is aimed solely at evolution. The disclaimer attempts to discredit evolution by labeling it "only a theory." An understanding of what a scientific theory really is would only disarm the disclaimer and force the witch-doctors to find another tar brush.

I will not tell you that god does not exist, because I do NOT know if he does or not. But again, it is NOT scientific.

If you cannot prove that God does not exist then you cannot dismiss the possibility of Creation out of hand as you are trying to do. Science is about truth seeking and if one dismisses possibilities without evidence then one is no longer seeking the truth and science becomes a joke which no one should bother with.

While science can only examine the material world, it can never disprove the immaterial which is very much a part of reality. In fact many scientists have become more certain about their religious beliefs through their scientific endeavors. They have considered their work as the discovery of the way God worked. Indeed, while science can only examine the material world, its discoveries prove the order in the natural world. Such order is inimical to a materialistic viewpoint since it shows intelligence and design in the Universe. Moreover, the product of science - the rules, formulas, equations, and cause and effect relationships formulated by science - have all a totally immaterial nature. This is so because the product of science is information, a totally immaterial concept.