[PatrickHenry]

Yippie! An old-fashioned creation vs evolution thread!

So that everyone will have access to the accumulated "Creationism vs. Evolution" threads which have previously appeared on FreeRepublic, plus links to hundreds of sites with a vast amount of information on this topic, here's Junior's massive work, available for all to review: The Ultimate Creation vs. Evolution Resource [ver 13].

[PatrickHenry]

Bump.

[PatrickHenry]

Bump.

[Exnihilo]

Junior's work is pretty comprehensive, but his definition of Creationism is rather limited wouldn't you say?

I've been told that I'm a "creationist" because I simply believe God was and is involved in biological development in some way.

These stupid threads will never end until everyone can agree on just what in the hell a "Creationist" is.

[VadeRetro]

[Creationist LeVake] proposed offering students "an honest look at the difficulties and inconsistencies of the theory without turning my class into a religious one."

In theory, there's nothing unreasonable in this proposal. There are all sorts of un-worked-out areas in evolution. The practical difficulty is the certain knowledge of what a 6-Day, young earth creationist means when he says "honest look." I've been seeing the creationist's idea of what "honest look" means for almost three years now. If there's one thing it isn't it's honest. For sure, it's nothing to be teaching kids who haven't been taught any real science yet.

[Rain-maker]

Amazing how mankind dechipers unwritten history, but has no clue of its future..

"God does not play dice." Albert Einstein

[Vladiator]

Oh boo hoo hoo.

[kdf1]

Deuteronomy 6:5 and numerous other scriptures talk about teaching children. The Government schools are qualified to teach Christian or Jewish children. Leave those schools to the atheists. I want back the ADA that I didn't get for my children. I want to separate my education money as a Christian from the atheist state system. The state owes refunds to all who have refused to subject themselves to their system based on freedom of religion.

[LuvItOrLeaveIt]

Does anybody have any links to peer reviewed Intelligent Design articles? All I could find in a Google search were religious sites, not a single peer reviewed article.

[WRhine]

Why should the USSC hear such a case? The whole basis of the case is to supplant religion in place of science.

[timydnuc]

A good teacher would take this and run with it.

Present Darwin and evolution. Lecture on the fundimentals of Darwin. Then you lecture on creationism. Stay neutral, but teach all the logic of both sides. Have the kids bring in articles that they have seen on the internet, church, books, Mom & Dad, make them examine the differences, without prejudist. Keep the debate logical and with scientific integrety. Let the class decide when the semester is over and all the scientific facts are in. Let them have an open and honest debate. Control the non-scientific rhedoric, keep the emotions and exterior influence to a minimum and let the kids research, talk, and let them make an informed, logical conclusion.

What will you have taught them? The technique of scientific investigation. The art of debate. A scientific method of research that is learned in graduate schools. You have given them the "Keys to The Kingdome" without ever "preaching" to them, one word of scripture.

Years ago I believed only in my self to save, and to keep life. I was misguided but I was the best that ever was. Today, I have found the entity that made me that good. I used to face God and call Him out. I used to swear at him for fighting against me. I've since come to a peace with Him. He gave me the inspiration, he gave me the knowledge, he gave me the dedication, but I can't do what He can do. Now He gave me humility. I'll fight Him when it come to those final hours of my patient's life, but I'll respect His decision. No matter what I do, no matter good I am, I can't change His decision. You're a better man when you understand that! I wish we could teach it in medical schools. It takes a long time, and a long road to learn it.

[Timmy]

Actually, the reason the Supreme Court denied review is simple. The liberals will vote philosophy over law every time, and, in fact, they are on the right side of this one. The conservatives recognize this is a case of the school having the right to determine what is taught, and has nothing to do with the Constitution whatsoever. The problem is that the school administrators prefer orthodoxy over truth, and that is the community's problem, not the Court's.

[Non-Sequitur]

bump

[Nebullis]

The AP story doesn't go into the details, but I did find some on Time.com . Apparently, "in a six-page "Position Paper on the Teaching of Evolution," LeVake pledges to teach evolution while also taking "an honest look at the difficulties and inconsistencies of the theory.""

This, at face value, seems reasonable and not sufficient for demotion. However, upon closer inspection, it's clear that the difficulties and inconsistencies are not scientific but run-of-the-mill creationist arguments.

"LeVake lists examples of irreducible complexity in nature for which, he says, Darwin has no explanation, such as the eggshell and the woodpecker's tongue. LeVake cites "the amazing lack of transitional forms in the fossil record. There has never been a creature discovered that could be considered a logical intermediate of any two major classes of animals or plants." "

[Rain-maker]

Therefore, what is the source of the "Big Bang"?

(crickets sound...chirp, chirp)
(crickets sound)

Ah yes, the ole bi-lateral brain trying to define a quasi-dimensional cosmos, truelly amazing...LOL

No one knows the absolute truth except the sociopathec delusional fool.

[editor-surveyor]

"Yippie! An old-fashioned creation vs evolution thread!"

How enlightening... (ho, hum)

Where are all those geeks that are descended from Gorilla Snot? - They should love this logic-killer thread.

[Lancey Howard]

The whole universe just happened all by itself for no particular reason.
Then it "evolved" all by itself, for no particular reason.
LOFL !!! What's so controversial about that?

[JasonC]

Schools can decide what they want to teach, and it is not like they hurt the guy or even fired him. I don't see the beef, really. Obviously, anybody who wants to teach his views has to convince not only himself, but the parents, other teachers, school boards, etc. No, debating children is not an adequate substitute for convincing their parents (who have the final say in how their kids should be taught). In which there is not the least "persecution".

[xzins]

I don't think the creation-evolution issue has anything to do with the court's decision. It has to do with whether or not a school board can require the teaching of certain subjects. The court says "yes."

Presumably, a board could also require the teaching of "The Bible as Literature" if it felt like it.

[js1138]

Yippie! An old-fashioned creation vs evolution thread!

Does this mean we're recovering from 911? Not that I want to stop pounding sand monkeys, but life does go on.

[Doctor Doom]

The mysticists never give up on their quest to inject irrationality into science.

Too bad nothing supports their contentions.