Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Win one for Intelligent Design...
methane47
Member UncommonPosts: 3,694
you might win some...but you just lost one..
Now it's all about choices... A theory called Evolution meet theory called Intelligent design
Evolution: Observes the trend....
Intelligent Design: Observes the big picture
Evolution: Test by sense
Intelligent: Proof by Common Sense...
Evolution: Randomly and relatively rapid occurring miracles of adaptation
Intelligent Design: Structured evolution with a brain
Evolution: uses facts....... and many unprovable "truths"
Intelligent Design: Uses facts to produce.. one big Unprovable truth
Welll... finally kids have a choice again...
What's your Wu Name?
Donovan --> Wu Name = Violent Knight
Methane47 --> Wu Name = Thunderous Leader
"Some people call me the walking plank, 'cuz any where you go... Death is right behind you.."
<i>ME<i>
Comments
I wonder how they plan to enforce this load of bullshit to my State's educational system. Surely science teachers who have been in the trade for decades aren't going to switch over because "The big man said they had to".
Seperation of church and state my ass. What a load of crap. Score one for Fascism
"Whoever controls the media controls the mind..-'Jim Morrison"
"When decorum is repression, the only dignity free men have is to speak out." ~Abbie Hoffman
Whether or not some intelligent power set these mechanics in motion, the mechanics themselves are what we call evolution. Evolution I can prove. I can't prove God. Therefore, I leave the teaching of God to the Temples, Churches, Mosques, and any other religious venue the world sees fit. The teaching of science, however, I leave to scientists, who follow scientific methods.
Further, I now demand recognition of the Flying Spaghetti Monster as a legitimate Intelligent Design Theory. The Flying Spaghetti Monster (FSM) created all that we know and are, and used His infinite powers to alter reality and thus cloud His existence from our senses. Pastafarrians will not be discriminated against.
But remember people, evolution's just a theory. Like that theory that says that the earth revolves around the sun. Oh wait, the bible's against that idea, too. If anything creationism deserves to be in the science text books because of all of the facts supporting it. No wait.... there's no shred of evidence that supports anything about it. But... but I ain't come from no monkey. I like my 'big invisible guy in the sky' theory -no not theory, sorry. option. it's an option. you have the right to choose either of the ideas (just so long as you pick creationism)
seriously though, if there really is a god, even he's laughing at kansas
EDIT: has anyone seen the episode of Bullshit where they make fun of creationists? at the end they compare them to this group that has almost exactly the same beliefs. except for one small detail: aliens instead of god. to which my friend pointed out, but that's just stupid.
A** Still Raw From Your Last SWG Subscription? Come join us at RLMMO.com
That doesnt make sense how could they consider Intelligent Design a scientific thing. As of know tehres really no way to prove and no proof that one intelligent being exists. As sawtooth said evolution is possible to Prove. Certain villiages/citys in mexico can drink the natural water without getting sick and if we(Most Americans) where to drink it we would get sick. That right there is Human Evolution. I dont really think that something that this closely relates to religion should be in taught in school( i personaly would be fine with it, but others wouldnt esecially of other religions). Thought, on the other hand, you can say that as of yet there is no way to prove that atoms exist.
-Cloudoffire-
What happens if the Muslim population explodes in the country, and we have to teach their version of creation, because they outnumber Christians, Jews, and Atheists together. Will the faithful Christian allow their children to learn this as a viable theory? How about a more likely scenario. What happens if Christian creation theories are taught. It's acceptable to Christians, until those theories become more refined, more pointed towards a particular sect of Christianity. Do Baptists want their children to be taught Methodist? Do Lutherans want their children to be taught as Catholics? If you think these distinctions are minor, ask a Lutheran how different they are from Catholics.
The theory of Intelligent Design is not an attempt to broaden children's perspectives, it is an attempt to introduce religious ideas into the classroom. If we allow this, it becomes one step closer to an officially sanctioned religion, and one step closer to discrimination against YOUR religion. Churches don't like to take money from the government for precisely this reason, because it allows government to dictate what's being done with its money in ways that Church doesn't want. If you do not oppose this movement from a scientific perspective, at least recognize that eventually, your religion is going to be marginalized.
This door swings both ways, and I oppose it from both ends.
EVERYTHING is thory in science.
its the theory of gravity.
the theory of time.
everything is a theory. A theory is pretty much proven, but science is constantly changing.
after 6 or so years, I had to change it a little...
both of those theorys are most likely wrong so who gives a flying puck which one they teach
-Cloudoffire-
No, natural selection.
Unless you consider a people like pygmy's devolved because of them being vertically challenged...
Because frankly, that's all your example is. It's like the purification of silver, and removing all the impurities. But guess what, in the end, you're still not turning silver into gold. It's just a nicer silver.
P.S.
You people flipping a lid over this crap...Look at the history of this nation. If you think, "Oh no! We're being controlled by evil right winged fascists!"
Then you'll be truely shocked at the deeply spiritual, and religious soil that this nation had. I guess some proof is that in the Supreme Court building, those 10 little laws that not many people follow...
But, "Omgzors! SHOCKA"S! It r be da evil roight winged facists! Dis cuntry hav da fundation uv facism!111!!!"
*Sings a tune to, "Liberal Paradise", by Right Allen Yanchovic*
"Fear not death; for the sooner we die, the longer shall we be immortal."
I can not believe people stilll buy the same old lies, just because they have been dressed in more modern clothing...
People: The ultimate proof intelligent life does not exist.
"This is not a game to be tossed aside lightly.
It should be thrown with great force"
Ok guys dont get confused...
Adaptation is NOT evolution
->Cells becoming immune or resistant to a chemical... may be evolution or adaptation.. depending on the stimuli..
But mexicans being able to drink a type of water that americans can is NOT evolution
a·dapt
v. a·dapt·ed, a·dapt·ing, a·dapts
- To make suitable to or fit for a specific use or situation.
v. intr.
- To become adapted: a species that has adapted well to winter climes.
ev·o·lu·tion
n.
1. A gradual process in which something changes into a different and usually more complex or better form. See Synonyms at development.
2...
3. Biology.
1. Change in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations, as a result of natural selection acting on the genetic variation among individuals, and resulting in the development of new species.
[left out redundant or irrelevant definitions]
while they are some what similar they are very different... Now on the theory of Evolution -> Scientists have to make guesses all of the place and make links from evidence that is millions of years old... And some so called observations that have no basis at all... You just have to believe... but we all have been taught these things so we are bred to believe them..
Now on Intelligent Design(ID) -> In my view it's a better idea but still lacking.. because Intelligent Design's theory encourages Evolution.. just not the "Theory of Evolution"(E)... The only thing that is different really between the beliefs of ID and E are the beginnings... Evolutionists say that we all came from a rock that evolved into people... Designists are saying that Life is too complicated a form to have spontaneously evolved from non-organic to organic.
it's like if you looked into a box of legos and saw a structure of lego that had an apparent design ... now it's possible that the pressure of the lego's in the box just happend to push the blocks together in that shape... or it's also quite possible that someone else created that lego structure. Now as the complexity of the design increases so does the probability of a creator.... right?
Now this isn't an exact depiction of life... but this example serves the purpose of my argument...
What's your Wu Name?
Donovan --> Wu Name = Violent Knight
Methane47 --> Wu Name = Thunderous Leader
"Some people call me the walking plank, 'cuz any where you go... Death is right behind you.."
<i>ME<i>
It's not about separation of church and state, and it's not about religion in the classroom, and it's not even about which theory is right.
It's about science being taught. You want to teach religion, argue about weather a religious class should be in the cirriculum. If you want to argue about weather intelligent design is science or not, then you put your theories in peer-reviewed publication and argue about it in scientific circles on scientific grounds, but until the scientific community (not just a bunch of scientists) accepts it, it IS NOT A VALID SCIENTIFIC THEORY and should not be taught in a SCIENCE class, even if it is right. End of story. Trying to do an end run around the scientific community to put ANYTHING into a scientific cirriculum that hasn't been accepted by the scientific community is wrong, no matter how right the theory turns out to be. You gather more evidence, present it and get it accepted. You don't hit the school board and the courts and try to jargon-talk them to your point of view. You're not going to get rational scientific debate out of that. You're going to get hot-heads pounding tables and people trying to confuse the issue.
.... Unless that happens to be what you want.
You guys are silly
Your evidence to disprove,
it disproves nothing.
Speaking of getting confused.
Lets keep in mind that INTELIGENT DESIGN IS NOT A THEORY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I.D is a dogma, you dont test it or question it or look for proof about it. You either accept it or you dont.
There is NO WAY to test the dogma of intelligent design!
Anyone of you that wants to use the word theory in relation to ID then please include in your post 1 test.... just 1 test, any test, any test you like, just 1, not 2 or 3 just 1 test you could do that would help prove or disprove any fact of the ID dogma.
For example to test the theory of evolution you can start with tests involving the examination of fossils. It is NOT IMPORTANT what those tests result in for the purposes of this argument.
What is important is that you can name hundreds of tests you could perform to at least begin the process of proving or debunking evolution. Thats because Evolution IS A THEORY!!! it can be scrutinised and tested using scientific methods. Many thousands of scientists world wide have been doing it for decades.
So name me ONE TEST!! you could do on any part of the the theory of ID to begin working out the facts or lack thereof behind it....
Go On THEN!
1 test ???
+-+-+-+-+-+
"MMOs, for people that like think chatting is like a skill or something, rotflol"
http://purepwnage.com
-+-+-+-+-+-+
"Far away across the field, the tolling of the iron bell, calls the faithful to their knees. To hear the softly spoken magic spell" Pink Floyd-Dark Side of the Moon
n. pl. the·o·ries
Well according to Webster ID is a theory... Whether or not ID is a Science... I would lean towards no...
Because science is a natural explanation of natural phenomenon..... But ID doesn't specify it's roots... It could be a science... or it could not... Well Since Kansas changed the definition of science... i guess it is now.. in kansas
And ID does have one test...sadly ONLY one ... but there test is observation... They concluded from their observations of life.. that it's too complicated for it to have spontaneously transformed from a rock into life.... so someone/something/flying spaggetti monster had to set things in motion...
What's your Wu Name?
Donovan --> Wu Name = Violent Knight
Methane47 --> Wu Name = Thunderous Leader
"Some people call me the walking plank, 'cuz any where you go... Death is right behind you.."
<i>ME<i>
Well actually that definition does more to define it as NOT a theory Im sorry
1. A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena
so where are the tests ??? This is exactly what I posted before (feels like hes talking swahili) How has ID been repeatedly tested ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? How is it Widely Accepted ????????????????????????????????????????????????? What preditions does it make that lead to natuaral phenomena ?????????????????????????????????????????
Where are the methods of Anaylasis ?
Where is the systematic or mathematical view ?
Point 5 illustrates my point perfectly. "The detectives staked out the house on the THEORY that criminals return etc" The THEORY is testable. If the criminals dont return then in this case the theory is wrong. Where is the test for ID ? What measure or test can you put forward to begin to find out if the dogma of ID is right or wrong ??
Only point 6 even comes close to supporting that ID is a theory. Because ID is indeed and assumption based on limited knowledge and conjecture. However the difference with ID is that YOU CANT TEST IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (for @#@#%#'s sake how hard is that to grasp ??????????)
Your not supposed to be able to test it THATS THE WHOLE POINT!
It fails every comparison to the definition of a theory.
+-+-+-+-+-+
"MMOs, for people that like think chatting is like a skill or something, rotflol"
http://purepwnage.com
-+-+-+-+-+-+
"Far away across the field, the tolling of the iron bell, calls the faithful to their knees. To hear the softly spoken magic spell" Pink Floyd-Dark Side of the Moon
Ehhh I think most of you have already graduated highschool by now and have your new found views from college. You most likely forgot about your 9th grade biology class. Its like watching some 40 year olds argue whether or not to let kids play monopoly or playstation.
Well Id like to make it clear for the record that I DO NOT dispute ID's possible truth.
I am not arrogant enough to say I KNOW for SURE ID is wrong. I dont. Anymore than the pop knows for sure if god exists or if Darwin knew for sure Evolution was right or wrong.
I am however pedantic enough to strongly assert that ID is not a theory.
As far as I am concerned schools can teach whatever the hell they want but they MUST at least do it properly and when you introduce a notion like ID to impresionable young minds then you could at least do those young minds the justice of telling them that this dogma is not a theory and CANNOT BE TESTED!!!
+-+-+-+-+-+
"MMOs, for people that like think chatting is like a skill or something, rotflol"
http://purepwnage.com
-+-+-+-+-+-+
"Far away across the field, the tolling of the iron bell, calls the faithful to their knees. To hear the softly spoken magic spell" Pink Floyd-Dark Side of the Moon
ID is a dogma
Evoltuion is a theory.
How does adaptation differ from Evolution?
Adaptation is just evolution on a smaller scale.
keep changing little things. and it eventually gets big.
Keep on adaptating, and one day, your somthing totally different.
Im not saying ID is wrong, and Evolution is right.
Im saying, that
"Adaptation" is to "Evolution", like "one step" is to "walking".
But for the record, I have never been religoius really, and its a loggical impossiblilty to be all powerful.
So
everyone has their own opinon, lets try to keep this clean.
after 6 or so years, I had to change it a little...
I think the whole issue is very clear. Creationism is not based on any facts. it's just a vague idea that "everything's really complicated". If we can let an idea based on nothing be allowed in a text book, we can allow anything and everything in. I don't see why they're so worried. If you believe in god, you're fine. If something like a week of being taught about evolution makes you loose your faith, chances are, you were f**ked from the start.
A** Still Raw From Your Last SWG Subscription? Come join us at RLMMO.com
Hit the nail on the head.
And personally I think we should teach EVERYTHING. Australian Aborignies believe the univers was created from a giant rainbow serpent moving acorss the sky and making things as he went. Why is that any more or less valid than ID or christianity ? We either teach none of it, or we teach it all.
Australia regards itself as a model secular society. Yet at the commencement of every sitting of State and Federal Parliment the Lords Prayer is read.
"O Lord we humbly beseach thee to vouchsafe they special blessing on this Parliment and prosper our deliberations to thy greater glory and to the true benefit of the Australian People." "Our Father who art in heaven etc etc etc...."
I have memorised that whole thing. Because every time I hear it I am reminded how absurd it is to say that you are a secular society with a separation of church and state then commence every sitting of government by reading a christian prayer.
It clearly all operates on a level of logic that my puny mind will never be able to understand.
I would have NO DRAMA with prayers preceeding parliment if it was a prayer to ALL faiths found in Australia and not just Christian. You cant have it both ways. The same is true in schools. You cant base your entire education system and values that flow naturally from it, on a total hipocrisy. Yet we do.
+-+-+-+-+-+
"MMOs, for people that like think chatting is like a skill or something, rotflol"
http://purepwnage.com
-+-+-+-+-+-+
"Far away across the field, the tolling of the iron bell, calls the faithful to their knees. To hear the softly spoken magic spell" Pink Floyd-Dark Side of the Moon
I'm sure you can read.. But i guess you are trying to be smart... A theory by the first definition is a set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena...
As you can tell from that it says "especially the ones that have been repeatedly tested" OR "especially the ones that are widely accepted"....
So if you Theories were a set... Then the set of repeatedley tested theories would be a subset of theories... and the widely accepted theories would be another subset of theories... and those two may intersect.... But theories are not limited to provable.. or testable... phenomena...
Take for example the theory of Dualism or Identity theory
Wikipedia says:
The word theory derives from the Greek theorein, which means to look at. According to some sources, it was used frequently in terms of looking at a theatre stage, which may explain why sometimes the word theory is used as something provisional or not completely resembling real. The term theoria (a noun) was already used by the scholars of ancient Greeks.
Or for examples... Black Holes are a theory... And they were a theory even before they were observed... But what they do and how they work is still just theory even though it isn't testable...
Now before you say it... I already know... Yes Intelligent Design isn't considered a theory by the Scientific Community .. but it is a theory none the less.....
For instance.. THe Theory of General Relativity.. Is NOT a theory by scientific method... but it IS one because people accept it as such ..... Relativity is unprovable... and not falsifiable... but i'm sure you guys have no problem teaching it as a science.... General Relativity had to create a new form of math to work with..... AND Relativity DISPROVES NUETONIAN physics!!!!! BUT DESPITE THIS OBVIOUS break in physics people still regard Both Relativity and Neutonian as truth... and valid theories.... The reason it WAS accepted was because of the observations made... and links to other things... so it is accepted Despite going against common-sense physics.
And what i meant that it could be a science and also it could Not be... is because if they suppose the beginning of time to a physical phenomena like Aliens.. then it would be science..... to a God? then it would be a religious belief...
What's your Wu Name?
Donovan --> Wu Name = Violent Knight
Methane47 --> Wu Name = Thunderous Leader
"Some people call me the walking plank, 'cuz any where you go... Death is right behind you.."
<i>ME<i>
Yup
And the observations that support ID are ?
and the links to other things that support ID are ?
Im not trying to be smart Im just trying to point out that some people are confusing the word "idea" with the word "theory"
+-+-+-+-+-+
"MMOs, for people that like think chatting is like a skill or something, rotflol"
http://purepwnage.com
-+-+-+-+-+-+
"Far away across the field, the tolling of the iron bell, calls the faithful to their knees. To hear the softly spoken magic spell" Pink Floyd-Dark Side of the Moon