Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Calif. School Scraps 'Intelligent Design' [El Tejon litigation]
The Dispatch (Lexington, N.C.) ^ | 17 January 2006 | JULIANA BARBASSA

Posted on 01/17/2006 11:24:31 AM PST by PatrickHenry

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 441-451 next last
To: tgambill
"Evolution may not technically be about the origins or life but it is linked with the lightening, methane, small one cell organisms that eventually evolved into what we have now."

It has nothing to say about the origins of life. That question is the province of abiogensis.

"It's very simple, God in fact created life from nothing after he set up the processes to sustain it."

So you say.

"Humans have only a four dimensional thinking capability and therefore cannot go beyond this. Therefore, humans try to explain the origins of life and such things in the four Dim. level. He cannot conceive of anything more than that......"

What evidence is there for more than that?

"Simple......that's it. there is scientific reasoning about God's creation and why evolution or other processes are not possible....."

And you have provided none of this *scientific reasoning*.
41 posted on 01/17/2006 12:06:04 PM PST by CarolinaGuitarman ("There is grandeur in this view of life...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: DaveyB
God is also a creationist.

Yeah, but the last time anyone wrote down his verion of the story was 5,000 years ago, in Hebrew. It has been translated so many times, and for so many political purposes, nobody knows what he actually said.

Heck - when it was first written, the creation story of Genesis (or at least days 4 through 6) might actually read "Dude, in about 8,000 years this guy Chickie D. is going to start explaining it all through scientific investigation. Chill out until then. For now, as far as you care, I did it all in 3 days."

Prove me wrong!

42 posted on 01/17/2006 12:07:41 PM PST by Vladiator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: DaveyB; PatrickHenry
"...10,000 clergymen endorse evolution..."

Corrupt clergy do not speak for Christ. We have the Bible for that.

"Corrupt clergy" like the Pope?

43 posted on 01/17/2006 12:08:58 PM PST by highball ("I find that the harder I work, the more luck I seem to have." -- Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Rudder

"Keep your nutball religiosity outta my science"

This was being taught in a philosophy class, not a science class.

Do you believe all religion is for nutballs?

I don't, but I do believe the religion of Atheism is for nutballs.


44 posted on 01/17/2006 12:11:17 PM PST by fizziwig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio

"Wrong. Creationism fails as a theory right away because it appeals to the supernatural, which is outside of the realm of scientific inquiry. Intelligent Design fails as a theory based upon a total lack of evidence and a lack of any meaningful falsification criteria."

*****Supernatural is exactly how you got here. If I get the time this week...I may drop in and explain it. It's also impossible to explain it for us four dimensional beings to understand. We like to explain it in the same way that stone age man would describe a computer game or TV......rough example but gives you my point. I don't even argue because of this reason.

Of course, the Bible and notion of God will be cast into doubt with more of these events, activity claims of life in outer space, all sorts of nonsense, but believeable to four dim beings.....simple


45 posted on 01/17/2006 12:11:28 PM PST by tgambill (I would like to comment.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: tgambill
Supernatural is exactly how you got here.

Unsupported assertion.

If I get the time this week...I may drop in and explain it.

Until you do, it's an unsubstantiated assertion and you can't expect anyone to believe you simply because you claim it to be true.

Of course, the Bible and notion of God will be cast into doubt with more of these events,

If I do assume a God, why should I assume it to be the God of the Bible?
46 posted on 01/17/2006 12:13:03 PM PST by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Rudder
"Keep your nutball religiosity outta my science."

I thought it was in philosophy. And who put you in charge of science anyway?
47 posted on 01/17/2006 12:13:22 PM PST by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: fizziwig
I don't, but I do believe the religion of Atheism is for nutballs.

How is the abscence of theism a "religion", and why is it for nutballs?
48 posted on 01/17/2006 12:13:33 PM PST by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio

Human knowledge has not even started yet....we are very very limited. Even Eintein proved the existance of God. He didn't like that too much either.....that's another story considering the K constant.....

Got to get back to work......:)


49 posted on 01/17/2006 12:14:22 PM PST by tgambill (I would like to comment.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
I won't be successful in heading off those who claim that this is somehow an "anti-Christian" result, but this should take care of that incorrect argument:

I am sure the numbers who are both Christians and understand evolution are much higher. Notice the word "understand".

I am both a Christian and understand evolution. I'm also toying with the idea that there might be some ID in evolution as well. I think God allows us free will. But that said, per the law, any notion of God belongs in a religious school not in the public school system.

50 posted on 01/17/2006 12:14:27 PM PST by phantomworker ("Don't accuse me of your imagination.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: fizziwig
This was being taught in a philosophy class, not a science class.

No, it wasn't. Calling something "a philosophy class" does not make it so.

Quick questions: in what type of philosophy class is "scientific evidence" introduced to discredit a philosophy? And in what type of philosophy class is one particular "philosophy" taught as being the correct one?

Words mean things. This wasn't a philosophy class, it was a Sunday School class.

51 posted on 01/17/2006 12:15:13 PM PST by highball ("I find that the harder I work, the more luck I seem to have." -- Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: tgambill
Simple......that's it. there is scientific reasoning about God's creation and why evolution or other processes are not possible.....

The point is both methodological and epistemological. Science has been co-opted by the naturalist (atheist)and no longer holds to the classical discipline of the scientific method. Bacon proposed a method of acquiring some knowledge through inductive reasoning using a method that meet the following criteria: observable, verifiable and repeatable.

Bacon and scientists until Darwin generally followed this discipline. But the matter is more than just method, the real issue is epistemological. Can science and its methods acquire all knowledge? Is all knowledge acquirable? Is there a higher form or method of knowledge? A Biblical world-view would place the revelation of God above corrupted man's reason and observations. But that doesn't end man's curiosity or the right use of science. That same revelation of God instructs us to "take dominion" to "consider the heavens" and to seek the wonders of God that He has revealed in His creation. That is why if one starts with "In the beginning God..." the discipline of science will always give God glory.

52 posted on 01/17/2006 12:15:16 PM PST by DaveyB (Peace follows victory - never before)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: tgambill
"Of course, the Bible and notion of God will be cast into doubt with more of these events, activity claims of life in outer space, all sorts of nonsense, but believeable to four dim beings.....simple."

Four dimensional beings can be quite powerful.


53 posted on 01/17/2006 12:15:25 PM PST by CarolinaGuitarman ("There is grandeur in this view of life...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

Why would any Christian parent want to send their children to an anti-God establishment such as the secular public schools? That is not obeying God's command to parents to "bring up your children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord." Their Christian faith is attacked daily in such a toxic atmosphere, and that is not what God considers a nurturing climate for the faith He has put in their hearts. No wonder so many of our youth are lost.


54 posted on 01/17/2006 12:16:22 PM PST by kittymyrib
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852
I thought it was in philosophy.

That's what they claimed, but just saying something does not make it so.

Words mean things. This was not a philosophy class, this was a Sunday School class.

55 posted on 01/17/2006 12:17:47 PM PST by highball ("I find that the harder I work, the more luck I seem to have." -- Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: highball
..."Corrupt clergy" like the Pope?...

If and when any man teaches contrary to the revealed word of God they are corrupt.

56 posted on 01/17/2006 12:22:01 PM PST by DaveyB (Peace follows victory - never before)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: DaveyB

Right. You know more about the Bible than the Pope.

Hokay....


57 posted on 01/17/2006 12:23:44 PM PST by highball ("I find that the harder I work, the more luck I seem to have." -- Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: highball
So they can't teach it anywhere because it isn't science even if it isn't being taught as a science class?
58 posted on 01/17/2006 12:24:17 PM PST by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale

The question "Why not?" following the statement "Philosophy classes have no place in high school anyway" is not fallacious in any sense of the word, so don't get your knickers in a knot. I was a philosophy major in college 30 years ago, so I have more than a passing interest in the topic.

I had read a good bit of philosophy prior to going to college and had little trouble understanding the major philosophical questions that I would study in more detail in the 4 years that followed.

I think the poster who suggested an elementary logic class was spot on, but for high schoolers to recognize that the systems of thought in evidence around them go back to ancient times is a good thing. Provides some much needed perspective. Questions of free will/determinism or issues of metaphysics/materialism are in no way beyond the abilities of a high schooler.




59 posted on 01/17/2006 12:25:06 PM PST by dmz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: highball
Right. You know more about the Bible than the Pope. Hokay....

Oh I ask for your INDULGENCE - Sola Scriptura - we fought for it 500 years ago - I'm willing to fight for it again.

60 posted on 01/17/2006 12:26:48 PM PST by DaveyB (Peace follows victory - never before)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 441-451 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson