lol america

[john5746]

ID is the basis for many religions. if you are going to teach the religions and their relation to history, usually ID ends up getting mentioned somewhere. although i do agree that they should not spend massive ammounts of time preaching the gospel to the students. lol.

 

To teach ID in a public school, it needs to be stripped of religion. So, if it is religious in nature, it should not be taught at all. Much like christianity isn't taught. It is mentioned historically here and there, but not taught in a course.

 

The proponents of ID don't want it tied to religion for this reason.

[zyncod]

You know, if 45% of Americans believe in creationism in some form or another (shocking but probably true), the 60 minutes of evolution that they were taught in high school, then the 60 minutes of intelligent design almost certainly will not make a dent in the other 55%'s beliefs.

 

And, to tell the truth, the only people that it matters whether or not they believe in evolution are biologists. Everybody else can be as shockingly ignorant as they want (as someone pursuing a career in virology, 90% of people have no idea what that word means, and one person - a college graduate- has actually asked "biology is science, right?"). Because you cannot be a biologist and believe in ID or creationism; nothing in biology makes any sense at all except in light of evolution. That's why, if you look at the Discovery Institute website, almost none of their "research fellows" are (or were, more accurately) actually scientists.

 

Then again, I'm one of those America-hating liberals. I don't think it would be such a bad thing if America was brought down a few notches, and the best way to do this is to allow conservatives to achieve some of their goals: deny entry of foreign grad students in the name of "security," further ruin the already abysmal state of public science education by introducing pseudoscience, and continue to cut the budgets of the NIH/NSF. Because the only reason that America is the sole superpower is it's science/technology capabilities. Really, the funny thing is, all us America-hating liberals want to do is stop America from killing people. It's the America-loving liberals that want to stop everything else that conservatives want to do.

[LucidDreamer]

I must reveal a secret. I like creationism. No, I don't believe a word of it; I like it because it challenges our thoughts about evolution and forces to really think about the concepts. The problem is the people behind creationism are fanatics and if you give them an inch they will run into the schools setting every book that has the letters evol on fire, tear apart any picture with a monkey, make every class a bible study, and promptly send us hurling back to the dark ages--chasing our neighbors with pitchforks, screaming "witch."

[beautyundone]

I must reveal a secret. I like creationism. No, I don't believe a word of it; I like it because it challenges our thoughts about evolution and forces to really think about the concepts. The problem is the people behind creationism are fanatics and if you give them an inch they will run into the schools setting every book that has the letters evol on fire, tear apart any picture with a monkey, make every class a bible study, and promptly send us hurling back to the dark ages--chasing our neighbors with pitchforks, screaming "witch."

 

 

ROFL!!!! nice...

[Bill Nye Guy]

what i find interesting about ID and the whole issue with Bush is that while many ID believers say that you dont have to believe in god to believe in ID most or even all of them seem to be God believers ( in particular christians)

 

I also would really hate it if they started teaching any form of creation in classrooms because they would probably ONLY mention the bible's version of creation not other religions. I am Hindu/buddist and even if they taught only ID its still a form of creation.

 

However if they DID start teaching ID i wouldnt think it would change anything. Most of the intelligent or curious students wont JUST listen to whats taught in class, they will explore and research both sides of the arguement. What i did find interesting was in the most recent TIME mag. ID people were saying how they were not yet ready to start teaching the material in classrooms because they didnt have enough evidence.

 

I also found interesting how many of the pepole interviewed on the mag. were saying you can NOT prove ID in the lab area, were else in Evolution's case you can find it much more of a presense.

 

To me all ID is, is really a form of creation against Evolution. It doesn't have much evidence or data to prove anything they say. Their only focus seems to just shoot down evolution, and not to prove any form of evidence.

 

Evolution in my opion is the best explanation for many occurrences. It has been able to keep up with many new discorveries and still keep a strong presense in the scientific community.

 

 

I also found an interesting note in Time saying how many ID members did accept SOME FORM or Role of evolution.

[ydoaPs]

how do you believe in ID and not believe in god?

[Hellbender]

i will agree with you there. it isn't really a scientific subject. but that doesn't mean it cannot be taught as an alternate idea.

See my post in the "Welcome Creationists..." sticky. Science isn't a democratic process. You teach the kids the theory that best fits the facts and thats that. There is no room for "alternate ideas" in science classes.

[rakuenso]

There is room for alternate theories, but alternate theories that have a basis.

[Hellbender]

To me all ID is, is really a form of creation against Evolution.

Whether we call it "new creationism", "stealth creationism"or "spin-doctored creationism", ID is just creationism with a new and catchy label.

It doesn't have much evidence or data to prove anything they say. Their only focus seems to just shoot down evolution, and not to prove any form of evidence.

Yup. Not one IDer or creationist has ever published their theories in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. I challenge someone to prove me wrong.

There is room for alternate theories, but alternate theories that have a basis.

Yeah, thats what I mean.

[Daecon]

I also would really hate it if they started teaching any form of creation in classrooms because they would probably ONLY mention the bible's version of creation not other religions. I am Hindu/buddist and even if they taught only ID its still a form of creation.

 

Well duh. What would you expect them to do? Pretend that other (ie. non-christian) religions can be valid belief systems?

</sarcasm>

 

What we need is a Theory of Everything that combines all the religion's creationistic stories into one unified whole. But I doubt the Americans would want that if it even so much as suggests that their God wasn't responsible for everything and they were right all along and they told us all so ha ha suckers!

[AzurePhoenix]

how do you believe in ID and not believe in god?

You could potentially believe in not one supreme god, but say, in a race or races of higher entities on higher planes. Not all powerful, and not perfect, but beyond us silly humans. Think "Ascended" Ancients from Stargate, or the Ellimist from Animorphs. Despite being pure speculation, this really appeals to me on certain levels.

[ydoaPs]

potentially good scifi, bad sci

[ecoli]

Exactly. That is the primary issue. The government is pushing for it to be taught alongside evoltuion' date=' as a science, in the science classroom. To be sciecne, we should be able to "see" or "sense" it in some way, and we simply must be able test the hypothesis. Faith is fine, but it has its place.

 

Although I do think that ID should only be taught alongside all other major religions from across the globe, in a class suitable for the subject-matter. Otherwise it's simply more Christian politics and favoritism.[/quote']

 

I completely agree. I have been saying it for ages on this forum. There is a major, not uncompatable, difference between science and religion. But in a science classroom, you don't teach religion, no matter what. This is just completely ridiculous, and whatever little trust I had in Bush is now completely gone.

[AzurePhoenix]

potentially good scifi, bad sci

Trust me, I know that, but it's certainly no more "out there" then picking up a Bible and saying "Oh, He must have done it with a wink and a whistle!." That's my point, that there can be other crackpot theories besides "God did it."

[ydoaPs]

just remember, FSM is not a crackpot theory; it has proof. just look at the correlation between the average temp and the number of pirates.

[AzurePhoenix]

Of course. No one could possibly be dumb enough to to persuaded otherwise. I've been wondering lately, does the FSM date?

[rakuenso]

Fsm?

[ydoaPs]

Flying Spaghetti Monster

[rakuenso]

I haven't giggled this much in a while

[Pat Says]

yup.. some states are going to incorporate controversies of evolution into their courses now. In other words, intelligent design is coming to a school near you!

America just got self-pwned.

[rakuenso]

Ohio and Kansas are the first ones =)

[Pat Says]

Lol, luckily I just got finished with biology. I don't think any teacher would appreciate me arguing with them for countless hours and I don't think I could handle all the conservative hypocrites that would give me evil looks.... ah who am I kidding... I live for it.

[AzurePhoenix]

It sucks, now I'm going to have to come home and teach my siblings actual science. Well, maybe not, Arizona always seems to be among the last to adopt stupid rules.

[Hellbender]

It sucks, now I'm going to have to come home and teach my siblings actual science. Well, maybe not, Arizona always seems to be among the last to adopt stupid rules.

Also why I am happy to be this far up north. However, there are still some fundies up here who make a big stink about things like this so that my high school bio teacher barely talked about evolution in any depth.

[ku]

i don't really see a problem... why not let the kids decide for themselves? if creationism is so obviously untrue, then what do you all have to worry about? i think kids are logical enough to figure out which is right and which is wrong.

Many religious creationists support the idea that both sides of an issue should be presented to kids who will then decide for themselves what is right, which is why these people let kids experience Internet pornography so that they can figure out by themselves that porn is immoral.