Posted on 08/05/2009 11:15:25 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Today’s top-selling biology textbooks present evolution as the only scientific view of the history of life. Often these textbooks use faulty or deceptive evidences to support evolutionary ideas. Fortunately, students can easily equip themselves with free materials that dissect textbooks and reveal the truth...
(Excerpt) Read more at answersingenesis.org ...
And speaking of goal posts...we have all the data we’ll ever need right here in this country, we don’t need to drag 7th century muslim countries into anything...well YOU do, I can understand that!
We have CLEARLY seen our ability to educate our children erode, and those that get it see it, and non-coincidentally many of them have taken their kids home or to private schools to get away from kooky liberals with multiple God-hang-ups because they see the problem EXACTLY for what it is:
godless NEA liberals hellbent on politically correct socialization of children in secular humanism, where all things Christian are verboten, is simply a failed substitute for an education. PERIOD!
Just face it, it’s a failed model...and all the strawmen in the world about Afghanistan and Angola can’t rescue you!
Aren't those '7th century muslim countries' creationists?
Thanks for the ping!
I guess it’s easy to say let it be taught for 10 minutes, KNOWING full well the implications would render everything after the intorduction a severe threat to evolution!
Not to mention alot of other things...I can just see it now...
the teacher starts going into the Cambrian explosion and the students quite naturally begin asking “doesn’t this situation CLEARLY favor an ID/creation model over Darwinism”?
I mean Darwin said it was a very gradual thing, and yet the cambrian explosion obviously more supports ID....(along with virtually eveything else.)
Like most liberals, Dawkins gets things utterly backwards...but they DO understand ID can’t be given even 10 minutes because the kids...and yes even 5 year olds understand...will spot this evo-cult for what it is a million miles away!
In the liberal world, up is down, down is up...thanks for pointing that out Ira!
I always like to see Dawkins in his own words...space aliens, etc. Keep him coming! ;)
“evolution taught as fact not theory and work from there...”
Repeating the same fallacy over, and over again is not going to make it true.
Or as you so aptly put it “I’m not going to show you the dozens of times again......with all your dishonest misrepresentations, irrelevant strawman questions and half-wit projections;”
Is Evolution only a theory?
Creationists argue that evolution is “only a theory and cannot be proven.”
As used in science, a theory is an explanation or model based on observation, experimentation, and reasoning, especially one that has been tested and confirmed as a general principle helping to explain and predict natural phenomena.
Any scientific theory must be based on a careful and rational examination of the facts. A clear distinction needs to be made between facts (things which can be observed and/or measured) and theories (explanations which correlate and interpret the facts.
A fact is something that is supported by unmistakable evidence. For example, the Grand Canyon cuts through layers of different kinds of rock, such as the Coconino sandstone, Hermit shale, and Redwall limestone. These rock layers often contain fossils that are found only in certain layers. Those are the facts.
It is a fact is that fossil skulls have been found that are intermediate in appearance between humans and modern apes. It is a fact that fossils have been found that are clearly intermediate in appearance between dinosaurs and birds.
Facts may be interpreted in different ways by different individuals, but that doesn’t change the facts themselves.
Theories may be good, bad, or indifferent. They may be well established by the factual evidence, or they may lack credibility. Before a theory is given any credence in the scientific community, it must be subjected to “peer review.” This means that the proposed theory must be published in a legitimate scientific journal in order to provide the opportunity for other scientists to evaluate the relevant factual information and publish their conclusions.
Creationists refuse to subject their “theories” to peer reviews, because they know they don’t fit the facts. The creationist mindset is distorted by the concept of “good science” (creationism) vs. bad science” (anything not in agreement with creationism). Creation “scientists” are biblical fundamentalists who can not accept anything contrary to their sectarian religious beliefs.
http://www.fsteiger.com/theory.html
It might prove helpful to understand the basics of the Scientific Method before you try to present an argument against it. This is stuff that was covered in 5th grade science class; do you recall the Science Fair?
Ummmm...do you undewrstand English? It was a most valid answer...just because you can’t bear it, doesn’t mean it’s not an answer child!
Pay attention...Yes, the theory, not the intolerable insufferable no dissent allowed godless liberal cult.
Do you have any concept of the differences?
Aren’t those ‘7th century muslim countries’ creationists?
Yes, but are they responsible for the liberal failures of teaching children in this country? Because if the libs included their input on modeling their curriculae...I missed it.
For that matter, isn’t Cuba and North Korea secular and teach evolution only...
are either of you going to address Detroit and Atlanta and all the failed inner city NEA debacles?
and none of you buffoons have addressed anything but your insane fixation on 7th century Islam.
Got anything else, or is this another obvious case of long drawn out painful failure and projections and strawmen on your parts?
Again.
Well the fact that the Cambrian Explosion started 545 million years ago and lasted for 70 to 80 million years might be a bit of a problem with your scenario.
“What about our own bodies? Each one of us is a machine, like an airliner only much more complicated. Were we designed on a drawing board too, and were our parts assembled by a skilled engineer? The answer is no. It is a surprising answer, and we have known and understood it for only a century or so. When Charles Darwin first explained the matter, many people either wouldn’t or couldn’t grasp it. I myself flatly refused to believe Darwin’s theory when I first heard about it as a child. Almost everybody throughout history, up to the second half of the nineteenth century, has firmly believed in the opposite - the Conscious Designer theory. Many people still do, perhaps because the true, Darwinian explanation of our own existence is still, remarkably, not a routine part of the curriculum of a general education. It is certainly very widely misunderstood.” ~ Richard Dawkins
http://www.vidyaonline.net/arvindgupta/dawkinsblindwatchmaker.doc
Huh? This thread is NOT about teaching evolution? I guess I will have to show you the title of the article.
"Biology 101: Dissecting Today's Textbooks (teach your kids how to spot Evo-religion in textbooks!)"
Here is a letter from the most influential group thanking GGGs ICR for their assistance.
From: arda ulusoy
Dear Sir / Madam,
The Science Research Foundation is a non-profit civil institution, which has a very significant place in terms of the intellectual and cultural setting of Turkey. The Science Research Foundation, as its name suggests, conducts research and holds symposiums, conferences, seminars and offers other social information services on scientific subjects.
The scientific works of the Science Research Foundation deal particularly with the origins of the universe, living beings and mankind. The SRF maintains that 19th century positivism, in rejecting religious beliefs and establishing scientific atheism, is rather flawed and it defends the Creationist interpretation of the origin of living beings and mankind, a stance having its roots in contemporary scientific findings. So far, the SRF has organized about 140 scientific conferences in different cities and districts of Turkey. Some of these conferences have been attended by foreign scientists thanks to the firm and sincere support of ICR. In addition, many exhibitions, multivision shows, radio and television programs have been organized. Research papers and articles on Darwinism are currently prepared to be published in various press organs. Beside this, the foundation has published many booklets and brochures on these issues.
The SRF is known with its activities about the collapse of the theory of evolution. Darwinism is the unique basis upon which the materialist philosophy, which utterly denies spiritual values and attaches importance only to material values, rests upon. Besides, Darwinism does not accept the fact that man is a being with a soul created by God and claims him to be a developed animal. As known, animal is a being bereft of wisdom. Therefore, it cannot be held responsible for the acts it performs. It is not accountable to its Creator for the selfish acts, murders, massacres or any aggressive attitudes it commits. The bloody ideologies of the 20th century, namely communism and fascism, also based the cruelty they exercised over people on this gruesome understanding of Darwinism. Consequently, demolition of the Darwinist thinking means the removal of these dark ideologies from the face of the earth. The reason why the SRF focuses all her attention on the collapse of Darwinism is to save people from this ideology which brings disasters to humanity.
The reason of this policy of SRF was mostly related with some official plans to include Darwinism as a scientific fact in the education system. In order to prevent such a harmful and wrong decision, the Foundation decided to display how modern science in fact disproves the evolutionary scenario of origins. The foundation is aiming to cooperate with many other creation or "intelligent design" scientists from all over the world.
The alliance of sincere and faithful people who desire the good for the humanity at such a time is of great importance. Any idea, comment or view in this regard will surely contribute to the intellectual struggle we have waged.
Looking forward to hearing from you soon.
Best Regards,
Dr. Arda Ulusoy
----------------------------------------------
One anti-evolutionist group in Turkey is the Istanbul based Bilim Arastirma Vakfi (BAV), or "Science Research Foundation", which was founded by Adnan Oktar. Its activities include campaigns against the teaching of evolution. It has been described as one of the world's strongest anti-evolution movements outside of North America.[63] US based creationist organizations such as the Institute for Creation Research have worked alongside them. Some scientists have protested that anti-evolution books published by this group (such as The Evolution Deceit) have become more influential than real biology textbooks. The teaching of evolution in high schools has been fought by Ali Gören, a member of parliament and professor of medicine, who believes such education has negative effects
Wow...do you think there might be a cult de-programmer in your area Ira? Because you’re in sore need of deprogramming.
“Repeating the same fallacy over, and over again is not going to make it true”.
That’s what you were told.
Now just repeating this along with these multiple projections thrown in, well see that just makes you look even sillier. And trust me there wasn’t that much margin to begin with here for you!
“...clear distinction needs to be made between facts (things which can be observed and/or measured) and theories (explanations which correlate and interpret the facts...”
Well that’s exactly right and that’s where the evo-cultists fall down on their faces and it’s why you people get so much grief...it’s that interpretation part Ira.
You see this latest monkey/lemur/whatever, what was it Lucy? you think this somehow is a “common ancestor” of Chrissy Fit Matthews...and although we’d LOVE to believe you, there simply isn’t any evidence to believe it...
but where it goes off the rails is when you libs fling poo at anyone and everyone that disagrees with your ...ahem...”interpretaions” and if that’s not enough...the poo flinging continues with “that’s not science”...and you think you own ALL the public money when you clearly don’t.
Frankly, you liberals are abject failures. On every front. The ideology, the methodolgy and above all the science.
A red flag goes up every time I hear peer review Ira.
You liberals have more than proven you can’t adequaely educate children, you just want to throw more and more money at an obvious black hole of a failure of public state run indoctrination centers, obviously hateful of all things Christian and conservative and normal folks have simply had enough of you Ira.
When I went to 5th grade science fair Ira, I learned more than you understand now, and the thing is...I wasn’t surrounded by liberal lunatics with so many God-hang-ups that they’ve been reduced to projecting their pathetic knowledge of science, so-called “peer review” and lack of intelligence on anyone and everyone that didn’t march lockstep with them and their fellow cultists.
But that was a time when I actually recognized the country too. So in some respects you liberals can be proud in a bizarre kind of way with all that liberal “success”: algore’s hot air cult, partial birth abortion...the science czar that thinks people aren’t people until they’re 2+ years old...and on and on...
BTW...it’s cute to quote Dawkins and his “give it 10 minutes”...but now you liberals REALLY impress us and put your money where your big mouth is for once Ira.
When liberals put up and shut up, give me a pingeroo Ira.
Otherwise, I’m not so impressed with your lack of knowledge, projections and evo-cult sham of peer review.
But DO keep quoting Dawkins by all means...but why not go all out and post some stuff by zerrhoid’s science czar while you’re letting all that liberalism glare! :)
Just let me sleep on it, and then I’ll pop some corn and get my sunglasses ready first!
Some of us made it passed the 5th grade in our science education.
At least you know why your story about homeschoolers and creationism is useless as evidence for anything.
Actually, she hasn't, but it doesn't surprise me that you can't see that. It would require the ability to break a question down into its component parts and look at each part on its own. That's not your strong point.
Taken together, the various Biblical descriptions of where we live pretty clearly describe a flat surface with a dome overhead keeping out a bunch of water, with lights affixed to the dome. That's what the plain meaning of the words describes. To get around that requires contortions about how "circle" really means "sphere" and "windows" are really "clouds" and all kinds of other interpretations of what it says in light of what we now know. Unfortunately, for some reason we're not allowed to make the same kind of interpretation in light of what we now know about the age of the earth and the history of life.
And so the word “circle” does just fine seeing that if a person is looking up at roughly half of a “celestial sphere” they would be standing in the center of a circle.
Only on a sphere is that possible no matter the location.
You see that's why plane (plane as in flat)geometry is o.k. in surveying relatively small tracts of land but not for really large tracts.
Now where are these “various Biblical descriptions” again?
They're part of "the rest of the world", and they don't teach evolution. I didn't "drag them in", they were part of the original premise. The goal posts stay.
When exactly was it that evolution ceased to be a theory?
While you may find it impossible to believe, people actually do disagree with you of their own free will.
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.