Why is religion introduced at such a young age?

[Powerman]

Personally I think ID does belong in private schools. At the same time, how are the public schools to deal with the holes in evolution/big bang or what have you? Just ignore?

No. Just teach it at face value. Say that there are holes in the theory as with any other theory. That would include theories about gravity magnetism and the like. Evolution is an observed fact. The reason why it is a theory is because they are trying to explain HOW it happened. We already know that it happened. I'm sure you'll argue that point but oh well.

Take a look at this link and you might learn something. This time I'm really going.

http://wilstar.com/theories.htm

Take care

 

[Annie]

No. Just teach it at face value. Say that there are holes in the theory as with any other theory. That would include theories about gravity magnetism and the like. Evolution is an observed fact. The reason why it is a theory is because they are trying to explain HOW it happened. We already know that it happened. I'm sure you'll argue that point but oh well.

Take a look at this link and you might learn something. This time I'm really going.

http://wilstar.com/theories.htm

Take care

Believe it or not, after checking your link, I think I'm at least as 'educated' as you. I have ba in pol sci-U of I. Sociology-U of Chicago, History-Elmhurst College. 3/4 of MS-University of St Francis. I have minors in psych, geography, and anthropology.

I don't think I need a reminder of what 'scientific theory' means...

 

[Powerman]

Believe it or not, after checking your link, I think I'm at least as 'educated' as you. I have ba in pol sci-U of I. Sociology-U of Chicago, History-Elmhurst College. 3/4 of MS-University of St Francis. I have minors in psych, geography, and anthropology.

I don't think I need a reminder of what 'scientific theory' means...

Well maybe you don't but most that argue against evolution do and would spare themselves the trouble of looking stupid if they read the link and learned something. Scientific theories are accepted as fact in the scientific community until proven otherwise. A theory in science is not the same as a theory outside of science. Thousands of scientists study these theories and try to disprove them. As of today evolution is the best theory we have to explain our existence and there isn't even a close second. There is no competing theory. There are some people on this board that don't want to admit that intelligent design is junk science but it is.

 

[manu1959]

.... Say that there are holes in the theory as with any other theory. That would include theories about gravity ...

just the other day i dropped an apple and it flew off into the sky :scratch:

 

[Nuc]

OK I see what you are saying. People that act scientific trying to disprove God...gotcha.

My point is that pathologists, anthropologists, paleontologists, biologists, genetic engineers and such don't do what they do because they are trying to disprove God. They are doing it because they have a quest for scientific knowledge or their work serves some other purpose. For instance my anthropology teacher in college is Dr. Mary Manheim from LSU. She is awesome. You should do a google search on her and see how much stuff comes up. She is one of the top forensic anthropologists in the country and works with CSI task forces to help solve crimes. Believe me if something happened to someone you loved and she could help find them or bring justice to them in the worse case scenario you would want this person on the case. What I find to be odd though is that (if the shoe fits) some Christians will assume that her views on evolution aren't worth any merit even though they know little of science themselves. It's kinda of like bible apologetics. Funny how you can say that one thing means this or that when it suits your purpose. There are some things in the bible that are so ridiculously absurd only a moron or a lunatic would defend them. I see you aren't one of these people but there seem to be a few out there.

Powerman, I can see where you are coming from and I agree with most of what you say. But if you know you're right and other people are superstitious morons or whatever why beat it into the ground? It's like yelling at a dog because he doesn't speak proper English. It seems like you lack confidence in your own ideas and won't feel vindicated until the rest say, "Hey, you're right and I was wrong." Of course religion is irrational. That may be one of its prime attractions to people. Maybe they need to believe in magic. Is this the only thing you can talk about? Move on.

 

[Powerman]

Powerman, I can see where you are coming from and I agree with most of what you say. But if you know you're right and other people are superstitious morons or whatever why beat it into the ground? It's like yelling at a dog because he doesn't speak proper English. It seems like you lack confidence in your own ideas and won't feel vindicated until the rest say, "Hey, you're right and I was wrong." Of course religion is irrational. That may be one of its prime attractions to people. Maybe they need to believe in magic. Is this the only thing you can talk about? Move on.

I'm just trying to wake people up so they might think a little bit. By the way if anyone would like to read up on intelligent design here is a good link.

http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery...p=8&curtab=2040_1&linktext=intelligent design

 

[LuvRPgrl]

Believe it or not, after checking your link, I think I'm at least as 'educated' as you. I have ba in pol sci-U of I. Sociology-U of Chicago, History-Elmhurst College. 3/4 of MS-University of St Francis. I have minors in psych, geography, and anthropology.

I don't think I need a reminder of what 'scientific theory' means...

I got you beat.

I have a FULL phd from the school of hard knocks. 14 years of heavy alcoholic drinking, and I mean HEAVY, even compared to the other drunks I have met in AA.

 

[LuvRPgrl]

It's because some people are too afraid to face the unkown by themselves and assume that there is some supreme being.

Alot of Chrisitians arent afraid to face the unknown.

I find it odd how atheists, instead of accepting the possiblity of a God, they come up with their own personal "theories" why so many have faith in a God, as though its a fact.

I have heard other reasons for people having faith
"it is the opiate of the masses"
"Because people cant accept the idea there isnt an afterlife"

etc, etc.

 

[LuvRPgrl]

So in other words your assertion can only definitely applied to ancient primitive people. And I suppose if you were to worship any object the sun would be a good choice seeing as no life would exist without it.

Actually, I think that response would be better directed at Misslemans post. He claimed early man didnt have answers to questions, today we are more likely to, so his scenario only answers why the ancients created and/or believed in gods/god.

Abbeys comment simply shows that at all times, in all places, a desire to worship has sprung up where ever groups of people existed.

 

[LuvRPgrl]

Honestly I don't have a problem with Christianity. I think that it has a net positive on society. I just disagree with fundamentalists that try to hold back science because it violates dogma. Those people are lunatics. I also have a problem with people who hate gays.

You say you dont, but if and/or since Abbeys assertation that you have said certain anti Chrisitian things repeatedly, you need to do more than just repeat you dont hate them. You need to either show you never made such comments, or if you did, then a reason for making them other than hating Christians.

 

[LuvRPgrl]

It's an act of desperation. They see the writing on the wall. They know that there time is coming to an end so they gather up as many weak minded people as they can brainwash into their cause and crank the fear tactics up a few notches. Makes sense to me. By the way I'm referring ONLY to the fundamentalists here. I'm not lumping all Christians into one pile.

WOW! That makes sense to you? It is apparent that you can come up with any "theory" to make your ideas work. Problem is, your theories cannot be proven, and if anything, are hard to swallow.

 

[LuvRPgrl]

I'm just trying to wake people up so they might think a little bit. By the way if anyone would like to read up on intelligent design here is a good link.

http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery...p=8&curtab=2040_1&linktext=intelligent design

You say God can neither be proven or disproven, then you say ID is junk. If God cannot be disproved, then you have to accept the "POSSIBILITY" of His existence, and hence the POSSIBILITY of ID.

What "science" do you have to prove ID is junk?

I know some proofs that evolution could not have possibly occured solely on its own.

 

[Annie]

Well maybe you don't but most that argue against evolution do and would spare themselves the trouble of looking stupid if they read the link and learned something. Scientific theories are accepted as fact in the scientific community until proven otherwise. A theory in science is not the same as a theory outside of science. Thousands of scientists study these theories and try to disprove them. As of today evolution is the best theory we have to explain our existence and there isn't even a close second. There is no competing theory. There are some people on this board that don't want to admit that intelligent design is junk science but it is.

Theories are not accepted as 'fact' until they are disproven. They are theories, open to continual testing, with consequent replication, diversions noted. As has been stated many times-much of evolution theory has been 'disproven', while some has been strengthened by replications and more evidence to back it up. I happen to subscribe to evolution for the most part, so I don't have an axe to grind here.

Many in the physics areas, go with the 'Big Bang' theory, which tries to close some of the holes in evolution. Any reason that ID doesn't do the same? I would assume that it will be added to the mix. The idea that their was a 'plan' by a divine source, letting time work-according to its plan, not that 'out there.'

 

[Powerman]

Theories are not accepted as 'fact' until they are disproven. They are theories, open to continual testing, with consequent replication, diversions noted. As has been stated many times-much of evolution theory has been 'disproven', while some has been strengthened by replications and more evidence to back it up. I happen to subscribe to evolution for the most part, so I don't have an axe to grind here.

Many in the physics areas, go with the 'Big Bang' theory, which tries to close some of the holes in evolution. Any reason that ID doesn't do the same? I would assume that it will be added to the mix. The idea that their was a 'plan' by a divine source, letting time work-according to its plan, not that 'out there.'

Intelligent design isn't considered a science because it claims that there is an invisible being that made things. That is a spiritual belief and should be seperated from scientific discussion. God and science can co exist but you can' t disprove evolution with spirituality. You have to do it with hard scientific evidence. Until someone does that then evolution will be accepted as it should be.

 

[Gunny]

Intelligent design isn't considered a science because it claims that there is an invisible being that made things. That is a spiritual belief and should be seperated from scientific discussion. God and science can co exist but you can' t disprove evolution with spirituality. You have to do it with hard scientific evidence. Until someone does that then evolution will be accepted as it should be.

Then so too should ANY theory of life's origin since EVERY SINGLE one is based on arguments unsupported by factual evidence.

Why are you intentionally misusing the word "evolution?" Evolution is the transformation of living things to adapt to an ever-changing enviroment. If one is not evolving, one is DEAD. It is not inconsistent with ID.

IF you are using "evolution" as a term to describe theories of origin, see paragraph 1.

 

[Powerman]

Then so too should ANY theory of life's origin since EVERY SINGLE one is based on arguments unsupported by factual evidence.

Why are you intentionally misusing the word "evolution?" Evolution is the transformation of living things to adapt to an ever-changing enviroment. If one is not evolving, one is DEAD. It is not inconsistent with ID.

IF you are using "evolution" as a term to describe theories of origin, see paragraph 1.

This may be tough to swallow but as of right now there is no competing theory with evolution. So I don't know what you mean by every single one in your first paragraph. And there is plenty of factual evidence to support the theory. Otherwise it wouldn't be accepted by anyone. You may not like what I just said but it's time to start waking up to the reality of it.

 

[Gunny]

This may be tough to swallow but as of right now there is no competing theory with evolution. So I don't know what you mean by every single one in your first paragraph. And there is plenty of factual evidence to support the theory. Otherwise it wouldn't be accepted by anyone. You may not like what I just said but it's time to start waking up to the reality of it.

Perhaps it is YOU who needs to wake up. Again, I will ask: are you stating that "evolution" is a theory of origin? If so, I contend that not only are you misusing the word, you are also wrong.

There is no more evidence to support "evolution" as a theory of origin than there is to support ID as a theory of origin. There is no evidence to support ANY theory of origin. They are ALL theories. That means guesswork requiring the faith of the believer.

You don't know what I mean because you refuse to see what doesn't support your anti-reigious ranting thread after thread; which, is the VERY reason people like you accept some scientific hocus-pocus theory as gospel - not because any evidence supports them.

 

[LuvRPgrl]

This may be tough to swallow but as of right now there is no competing theory with evolution. So I don't know what you mean by every single one in your first paragraph. And there is plenty of factual evidence to support the theory. Otherwise it wouldn't be accepted by anyone. You may not like what I just said but it's time to start waking up to the reality of it.

Regarding the use of the term "theory" it is probably misused, but when used in most speech, it doesnt refer to it as though it is scientific law, but more as the way a lay person would interpet the term. If you want to get scientifically technical, I dont accept the term "theory" to describe evolution.

Evolution cannot be the way life originated. Its impossible.

If I was to take all the components of a house and throw them into a lake, would they ever float around and accidentally form a house? Is it even possible they could? I submit, no and no. Its impossible. Can you prove it, Im not sure. I dont see threaded joints somehow threading themselves into each other.

Its the same for the single cell, way to complex to have accidentally evolved in some primordial soup. It was an interesting "hypothesis" until we actually were able to discover the complexities involved in the single cell.

 

[manu1959]

at one point there was nothing ............. then there was something ....... evolution is the changes in the something not the creation of the something .....

 

[LuvRPgrl]

at one point there was nothing ............. then there was something ....... evolution is the changes in the something not the creation of the something .....

Its my opinion that is one event our finite brains are not , at least now, capable of comprehending. If there was a time there was nothing, then there would always be nothing, according to our line of logic. Somewhere it must break down.

To continue it, if there is something, then there must have always been something, and that goes into infinity,

Isnt one of the scientific laws that matter can neither be created nor destroyed, only changed?

Hence, the spiritual existence of God, must be a non physical entity, and He converted some of that entity into physical existence.

Hold on, my brain is starting to hurt.