Skip to main content

quote:
If, by "curriculum" you mean public school curricula, you're dead wrong. Transcendental religion is still just religion, and we don't teach that in schools.

The simple reason why science does not include religious elements is because science, like evolution, uses data and evidence to form conclusions. Religion owns no evidence, therefor we are free to believe any religious ideas we want.


Transcendence is not justification for teaching religion and I think I have demonstrated that Creation and ID can be taught without teaching any particular religion or doctrine of any specific religion. It can be taught in a generic way as to acknowledge that it is a theory accepted by millions of people, many religious, many not. It is a theory that origins began from some unknown process set in place by someone Intelligent with purpose and direction. Many call this person God others a deity but it is a rational and valid competing theory to Evolution not beholden on dependent upon science to verify.


transcendent |tranˈsendənt| adjective beyond or above the range of normal or merely physical human experience : the search for a transcendent level of knowledge. • surpassing the ordinary; exceptional : the conductor was described as a “transcendent genius.” • (of God) existing apart from and not subject to the limitations of the material universe. Often contrasted with immanent . • (in scholastic philosophy) higher than or not included in any of Aristotle's ten categories. • (in Kantian philosophy) not realizable in experience.

I'm not trying to battle or reason against Science but rather bad science which is tainted by bias and prejudice attempting to control the argument and debate unfairly. The same scenario is being played out in the Climate Change controversy and scientific circles about just what is undeniable fact and what is legitimate, untainted evidence. Like with ID and Creationism if certain scientist or educators dare to consider even the possibility of competing theories to the accepted norm then they are un-ceremonially banished from any decision making positions or teaching positions in direct attempts to squelch differing scientific opinions.

Again I'm not advocating teaching religion or Bible in public schools but I am advocating fairness and consideration of all major competing theories of our origins. I regret that's too much to ask.
quote:
Originally posted by buffalo:

Crusty ole boy,

There is nothing more irritating to a train of thought than a interruption by someone who insists it must coincide with what the interrupter might discover if it tried.


Ummmmm..... okay, I'm sure you are right. I just don't understand what it is you said. Who or what is "it"? And how can a train of thought be irritated?
quote:
Originally posted by CrustyMac:
quote:
Originally posted by buffalo:

Crusty ole boy,

There is nothing more irritating to a train of thought than a interruption by someone who insists it must coincide with what the interrupter might discover if it tried.


Ummmmm..... okay, I'm sure you are right. I just don't understand what it is you said. Who or what is "it"? And how can a train of thought be irritated?


Crusty,

You were eager to put a spin on gb’s theory and read the mind of his intention but you just sit idly by with no leg work of your own.

That forces me to conclude you are lazy and wait for some moment when you can be seen as Scut Farkus or a toadie to slim.

I'm always right, I know these things.
quote:
Originally posted by buffalo:

At this time I am engaged in two different studies that suggest that very thing; Matter and Antimatter Asymmetry after the Big Bang ,how it could have occurred and how we are effected by asymmetry(if there is in fact an asymmetry) at the present time . The second study has to do with the complications in the study of biology as it has reached a scale in which classical thinking is insufficient and must be integrated with the thinking as in quantum physics.


Haaa! Who are you trying to fool?
it would take substantial faith for me to accept that you are involved in such a study. There is a substantial lack of evidence that you would have the education to grapple with anything like this.

What educational institution is sponsoring this study, buff?
quote:
Originally posted by Sofa King:
quote:
Originally posted by buffalo:

At this time I am engaged in two different studies that suggest that very thing; Matter and Antimatter Asymmetry after the Big Bang ,how it could have occurred and how we are effected by asymmetry(if there is in fact an asymmetry) at the present time . The second study has to do with the complications in the study of biology as it has reached a scale in which classical thinking is insufficient and must be integrated with the thinking as in quantum physics.


Haaa! Who are you trying to fool?
it would take substantial faith for me to accept that you are involved in such a study. There is a substantial lack of evidence that you would have the education to grapple with anything like this.

What educational institution is sponsoring this study, buff?


You are wrong biiiiiiiiig boie.
quote:
Originally posted by Sofa King:
Gb,

Time had a beginning. It is not infinate. It will also have an end at the heat death of this universe trillions of years from now.

Physics allows for the possibility of other universes where time is measured differently from ours including time running backwards so that effect preceeds cause.


sofa it is not nessessary to fly to another universe for time differences. Relativity allows for time differences right here on Earth. Biiiig boie.

And yes I'm envolved in those studies. Do you want to join in? If so I will give you an assignmennt.
Here’s one just in case.

Eliminate each known elementary particle or show a model of any of the same that would have been responsible for symmetry breaking allowing for the universe as it seems to be made of matter and no anti matter. The big bang model calls for equal amounts of matter and antimatter at the time of the big bang.

Since we assume we are here and not annihilated by antimatter. What happened to the antimatter.

Is it all pilled up in one area of the universe waiting on some un-expecting matter to wander off into it.

Possibly all matter disappeared into radiation and we are just figments of our imagination.
quote:
Originally posted by gbrk:


Again I'm not advocating teaching religion or Bible in public schools but I am advocating fairness and consideration of all major competing theories of our origins. I regret that's too much to ask.


GK.

Yes you are. That is exactly what you are advocating. How do you think that creationism/ID can be taught without the subject of the bible, or god being brought into it? That is the whole backbone of the idea of creationism.

It is as if you think that without teaching this in our public schools, then somehow it is completely taking your right away to teach these ideas to your children. Thats ludicrous. Even if a child didn't live in a house with parents who believed as you do, they would still know about the bible, creationism/ID. Its everywhere! It is not being hidden away and beat down.

I would love to see how (and at what age) you think creationism can be taught without bringing up the bible or god. Please give me an example of how that science class would go. If you have kids (and I think you said you did) then you know that they have lots of questions when they don't understand something. So by saying that some people believe that the earth and its inhabitants were created by something supernatural you will at that point have to explain where and how these people come to this conclusion. That is how science works. So what should or would the teacher tell those students that ask the most obvious question there is to creationism, without talking about the bible?

I have given up on having any kind of meaningful discussion with you on evolution, but I am very curious on how you think your agenda can be accomplished without bringing religion into public schools.

Not that I believe you or any other creationist will ever have that opportunity. I am so glad that I was born in America, and not in Iran.
quote:
Originally posted by buffalo:
quote:
Originally posted by CrustyMac:
quote:
Originally posted by buffalo:

Crusty ole boy,

There is nothing more irritating to a train of thought than a interruption by someone who insists it must coincide with what the interrupter might discover if it tried.


Ummmmm..... okay, I'm sure you are right. I just don't understand what it is you said. Who or what is "it"? And how can a train of thought be irritated?


Crusty,

You were eager to put a spin on gb’s theory and read the mind of his intention but you just sit idly by with no leg work of your own.

That forces me to conclude you are lazy and wait for some moment when you can be seen as Scut Farkus or a toadie to slim.

I'm always right, I know these things.


You are right, I am lazy. I'll have to google Scut Farkus later. Must be before my time.

I don't think I tried to read anyone's mind, gb laid out an extensive post detailing what was on his mind.

I'm no toadie, I leave that for your crew.
quote:
I'm not trying to battle or reason against Science but rather bad science which is tainted by bias and prejudice attempting to control the argument and debate unfairly...Again I'm not advocating teaching religion or Bible in public schools but I am advocating fairness and consideration of all major competing theories of our origins. I regret that's too much to ask.


If you have evidence of bad science, write it up. Have it peer-reviewed and published. You'll win a Nobel Prize.

There is only one major theory of the origin of species: Evolution. It's the only one with evidence behind it. Your preferred hypothesis, Creationism, has nothing to support it except the Bible, which is somewhere between nothing and less than nothing as scientific evidence.

nsns

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×