Tenn. Senate OKs Bill To Allow Anti-Evolution Talk In Classrooms

#126
#126
As far as I'm concerned they can teach creationism and ID in a sociology or philosophy class all they want, but they don't belong in a science class.
 
#127
#127
KiffinKiller said:
i dislike dawkins immensely. he's as bad as televangelists, imo
Click to expand...

Put Dawkins' disdain for religion aside and he is still a brilliant biologist. When it comes to evolution I would trust what he has to say over any televangelist on what they have to say about God.
 
#131
#131
burntorangeVOLffle said:
Put Dawkins' disdain for religion aside and he is still a brilliant biologist. When it comes to evolution I would trust what he has to say over any televangelist on what they have to say about God.
Click to expand...

thats fine - I meant it in the sense that he goes on TV with the sole purpose of trying to convince the religious that they are wrong. What is the point?
 
#135
#135
I honestly think both sides of this argument needs to be in philosophy classes not science... on the "orgins of life" argument. Who cares? It doesn't help us solve what is facing us now: Cure for cancer, aids, ed etc. And it's sure as hell not going to bring us any closer to alternate energy sources or flying cars.

Does evolution exsist in the form of adaptation? You bet. But I think both sides of the whole "creation" spectrum take just as equal leaps of faith, and ultimately are pointless other than pushing a certain worldview.
 
#136
#136
OrangeYankee said:
I honestly think both sides of this argument needs to be in philosophy classes not science... on the "orgins of life" argument. Who cares? It doesn't help us solve what is facing us now: Cure for cancer, aids, ed etc. And it's sure as hell not going to bring us any closer to alternate energy sources or flying cars.

Does evolution exsist in the form of adaptation? You bet. But I think both sides of the whole "creation" spectrum take just as equal leaps of faith, and ultimately are pointless other than pushing a certain worldview.
Click to expand...

No. One side has facts, studies, and experiments to back it up. The other has ancient scripts written by sand dwellers with no understanding of biology or evidence to back it up.
 
#137
#137
I guess my whole point is to me for the advancement of our species and our planet all of that is really irrelavent, and I'm just tired of both of the sides slinging poop at each other to try to discredit each other. To me this whole debate is killing our advancement, and it honestly has little if anything to do with said advancement.
 
#138
#138
OrangeYankee said:
I honestly think both sides of this argument needs to be in philosophy classes not science... on the "orgins of life" argument. Who cares? It doesn't help us solve what is facing us now: Cure for cancer, aids, ed etc. And it's sure as hell not going to bring us any closer to alternate energy sources or flying cars.
Click to expand...

so anything that doesn't bring us closer to flying cars shouldn't be studied outside of some liberal arts elective? Why would scientific study of where we came from not be relevant?
 
#139
#139
OrangeYankee said:
I honestly think both sides of this argument needs to be in philosophy classes not science... on the "orgins of life" argument. Who cares? It doesn't help us solve what is facing us now: Cure for cancer, aids, ed etc. And it's sure as hell not going to bring us any closer to alternate energy sources or flying cars.

Does evolution exsist in the form of adaptation? You bet. But I think both sides of the whole "creation" spectrum
take just as equal leaps of faith, and ultimately are
pointless other than pushing a certain worldview.
Click to expand...

Good post.

The origin of life is the big argument, imo.
 
Last edited:
#140
#140
OrangeYankee said:
I honestly think both sides of this argument needs to be in philosophy classes not science... on the "orgins of life" argument. Who cares? It doesn't help us solve what is facing us now: Cure for cancer, aids, ed etc. And it's sure as hell not going to bring us any closer to alternate energy sources or flying cars.

Does evolution exsist in the form of adaptation? You bet. But I think both sides of the whole "creation" spectrum take just as equal leaps of faith, and ultimately are pointless other than pushing a certain worldview.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Studying the "now" is more important than how we got here. That's what the philosophy class at my high school discusses.
 
#141
#141
burntorangeVOLffle said:
I am so relieved to see most on this thread trust the science behind evolution and agree that creationism should not be taught in school. There have been several very intelligent comments on here.

I'm saddened by the "just a theory" folks who clearly don't understand what a theory means in scientific terms. This didn't necessarily happen in this thread but I also find it amusing when the evolution doubters point to the holes in Darwin's Origin of Species as if its the last word on the subject (and the bible for aetheists). OoS was just the spring board and so much more has been researched, experimented, and observed that many of those holes have been filled. Enough to essentially prove the "theory" as a whole.

Gov Haslam took the cowards way out by letting the bill pass without his signature. This is really an embarrassment to not only the state of TN but south in general. Intelligent republicans should also be ashamed as their party gets dragged deeper into becoming known as the anti-intellectual party.

If any one is interested in watching an interesting and humorous take on the fight against evolution in public schools check Flock of Dodos. It's on netflix.
Click to expand...

There are more holes in evolution than could possibly be listed on a message forum. My aunt and uncle are both microbiologists and they acknowledge these huge gaps and believe in Creation. I love it when pseudo-scientists present evolution under a broad umbrella term and hope people are ignorant to the many types. Beyond variation in species (such as different types of dogs and perhaps wolves having a common ancestor) there is no proof of evolution ever occuring. There are far too many "assumptions" and "inferences" necessary to even rationalize micro and macro evolution. This will keep evolution as it is, a theory, and prevent it from ever becoming scientific law. It is not demonstrable and therefore is just an idea. Science believed firmly a few hundred years ago that the earth was flat and the sun revolved around the earth. To take an unproven idea now and somehow put it above even being questioned is insane. If you choose to swallow it hook line and sinker that's your problem. To act as if other peoples children shouldn't be taught differently is wrong.
 
#142
#142
marcus, should creationism be taught in schools? Is so, what class should it be included in?
 
#143
#143
Gramps said:
Creationism is faith, not a theory
Click to expand...

It takes just as much faith if not more to believe in evolution in the sense that's being discussed here. They believe it rained for millions of years and different elements (minerals etc.) Magically arranged themselves in an exact pattern so complex that modern scientists with millions of dollars worth of equipment and taxpayer money cannot do...to make 1 protein. Then after this process happened a trillion or 2 times on pure luck these proteins just happened to line up perfectly and make a single cell..this cell and the trillions just like it fortunately knew how to line up and work together perfectly to "evolve" into very complex creatures. One of the earliest examples is a squid. Unfortunately the squid has ont of the most complex eyes on earth. Thousands of times more complicated than even a human eye. It takes a lot of faith to believe in an infinite amount of occurrences to take place accidentally in order to make a single cell. It takes a lot of faith for anyone to believe they came from a rock. Christians are at least willing to acknowledge the faith their beliefs require. It would be nice if evolutionists would as well.
 
#144
#144
utvolpj said:
marcus, should creationism be taught in schools? Is so, what class should it be included in?
Click to expand...

I believe Creation and evolution should both be offered to students as acceptable theories as to where life came from. As a parent its my responsibility to help shape the minds and beliefs of my children. I am very opposed to evolution being taught in schools as fact. I was fed that by my biology teacher and was taught it in a manner that is common on this forum that I would have to be intellectually inferior to believe otherwise.that is far from the truth. I don't wish that my beliefs were forced on others in their science class. I believe in the freedom to choose.
 
#145
#145
marcusluvsvols said:
I believe Creation and evolution should both be offered to students as acceptable theories as to where life came from. As a parent its my responsibility to help shape the minds and beliefs of my children. I am very opposed to evolution being taught in schools as fact. I was fed that by my biology teacher and was taught it in a manner that is common on this forum that I would have to be intellectually inferior to believe otherwise.that is far from the truth. I don't wish that my beliefs were forced on others in their science class. I believe in the freedom to choose.
Click to expand...

you think creationism should be taught in a science class? You claim evolution has holes but yet creationism has nothing but a hole. How do you justify that it has anything to do with science? At least with evolution people are still trying to find out more. The same can't be said for creationists

Also, which god should be taught as the ultimate creator? Only the Christian one?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#146
#146
utvolpj said:
you think creationism should be taught in a science class? You claim evolution has holes but yet creationism has nothing but a hole. How do you justify that it has anything to do with science? At least with evolution people are still trying to find out more. The same can't be said for creationists
Click to expand...

I never stated that it should be taught in science class, but I think that is probably where it needs to be mentioned. Not because I believe it to be scientific..creation is not scientificly demonstrated or replicated by man...but neither is evolution in the sense we are discussing it. If the theory of evolution is presented as an origin of all life as we know it then creation should be mentioned in the same breath as an alternative belief. It requires no more faith for me to believe that God made Adam and Eve than it requires for you to believe you came from "rock wash".
 
#147
#147
Don't blast me here, because I'm admitting my ignorance, but I don't even know what evolutionists' theory on the beginning of time is.
I'm having trouble understanding the huge problem between supporting creationism and evolution. It's the Catholic Church's stance that God created evolution.
I've heard Richard Dawkins call the beginning of life "an accident." Is that the discrepancy here? Do those passionately against the idea of Intelligent Design just throw their certainty behind the claim that it was all an accident?
If that's the case, I really don't see how one is less believable than the other. One theory feels like it gives optimism and a feeling of purpose while the other seems a little depressing. Why the passionate hatred by so many against creationists?
 
#148
#148
marcusluvsvols said:
I never stated that it should be taught in science class, but I think that is probably where it needs to be mentioned. Not because I believe it to be scientific..creation is not scientificly demonstrated or replicated by man...but neither is evolution in the sense we are discussing it. If the theory of evolution is presented as an origin of all life as we know it then creation should be mentioned in the same breath as an alternative belief. It requires no more faith for me to believe that God made Adam and Eve than it requires for you to believe you came from "rock wash".
Click to expand...

Evolution is science and that's why it is taught in that class. If even you admit creationism has nothing to do with science then why would it be brought up as an alternate theory? How many alternate beliefs should be presented? In other words, do you reject all other possible creation stories except the one presented in your bible?

the difference in your "faith" example is that science is willing to keep searching for answers. That's what it does
 
#149
#149
marcusluvsvols said:
It takes just as much faith if not more to believe in evolution in the sense that's being discussed here. They believe it rained for millions of years and different elements (minerals etc.) Magically arranged themselves in an exact pattern so complex that modern scientists with millions of dollars worth of equipment and taxpayer money cannot do...to make 1 protein. Then after this process happened a trillion or 2 times on pure luck these proteins just happened to line up perfectly and make a single cell..this cell and the
trillions just like it fortunately knew how to line up and work together perfectly to "evolve" into very complex creatures. One of the earliest examples is a squid. Unfortunately the squid has ont of the most complex eyes on earth. Thousands of times more complicated than even a human eye. It takea lot of faith to believe in an infinite amount of occurrences to take place accidentally in order to make a single cell. It takes a lot of faith for anyone to believe they came from a rock. Christians are at least willing to acknowledge the faith their beliefs require. It would be nice if evolutionists would as weill.
Click to expand...

I think Marcus just called me an evolutionist.
 
#150
#150
Panthro said:
Why the passionate hatred by so many against creationists?
Click to expand...

my issue (and it's not hatred by any means) is with creationism being taught in any science class or outside of any class not labeled religion/philosophy. What this bill seems to be doing is opening up the discussion of creationism in science classes. Of course I doubt many behind this bill would want anything but the Christian view of creation to be discussed
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top