Creation vs Evolution (split from other thread)
Moderators: Theodore, elliemaejune
-
- User
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 6:12 pm
Last edited by Against Homeschooling on Tue Mar 28, 2006 6:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- User
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 6:12 pm
Momo3boys, the ICR is a questionable authority at its best and a pseudoscientific deceiver at its worst. Radiometric dating is a solid scientific principle that cannot be shaken by a few religious fundamentalists. The fallacy, not that I want to delve too far into it, is that were the few scientific principles found in conflict with holy texts not extent, there would be nobody trying to disprove them. By extension, the argument is a religious one and not a scientific one, and it is deceptive to pass one off as the other. I don't have a problem with faith-based justification of religious conflicts with the scientific world as long as they are taught to kids along with the accepted scientific theories as a counterweight. I do not see this happening consistently.
A credible link please, Theodore?
Your point is well taken, mom. However, you are talking about high schoolers themselves, while this forum is frequented by adult educators. I challenge you to find an English teacher who would correspond with others in his or her field while displaying basic grammatical flaws or, heaven forbid, all capital letters. I assure you that we are in agreement that the average American possesses a terrible grasp of the English language. However, as you said, it is possible to work with the system and help your child get the best out of his or her education regardless.
Your comments, Tiarali, are hysterical and quite incoherent. I assure you that people of all opinions frequent the public education system and that, working with good teachers, are exposed to many different viewpoints. In fact, I would counter your insinuations of brainwashing by pointing out that homeschoolers are generally exposed to a far more limited range of viewpoints than those in public school. Many homeschoolers (I believe that at least one has responded to this particular thread) actually homeschool with a primary intent of limiting their kids' influences in fear that they will be prematurely corrupted.
And as far as the argument about my seeming anecdotal? Yes, I am, and I'm quite upfront about this. The national media and public opinion seem to dictate that homeschooling is a wonderful option and a glorious antidote against an evil and oppressive public school system. I have not seen homeschooling "succeed" in the kids who live near me or those who I know who live in other locations. I believe that with good research, it will be found that homeschooling is not the cure-all that it has often been made out to be. I find it impossible given the attitudes of homeschooling families and the literature and resources to which they refer to believe that homeschoolers are consistently gaining the social experience necessary to compliment their academic progress.
A credible link please, Theodore?
Your point is well taken, mom. However, you are talking about high schoolers themselves, while this forum is frequented by adult educators. I challenge you to find an English teacher who would correspond with others in his or her field while displaying basic grammatical flaws or, heaven forbid, all capital letters. I assure you that we are in agreement that the average American possesses a terrible grasp of the English language. However, as you said, it is possible to work with the system and help your child get the best out of his or her education regardless.
Your comments, Tiarali, are hysterical and quite incoherent. I assure you that people of all opinions frequent the public education system and that, working with good teachers, are exposed to many different viewpoints. In fact, I would counter your insinuations of brainwashing by pointing out that homeschoolers are generally exposed to a far more limited range of viewpoints than those in public school. Many homeschoolers (I believe that at least one has responded to this particular thread) actually homeschool with a primary intent of limiting their kids' influences in fear that they will be prematurely corrupted.
And as far as the argument about my seeming anecdotal? Yes, I am, and I'm quite upfront about this. The national media and public opinion seem to dictate that homeschooling is a wonderful option and a glorious antidote against an evil and oppressive public school system. I have not seen homeschooling "succeed" in the kids who live near me or those who I know who live in other locations. I believe that with good research, it will be found that homeschooling is not the cure-all that it has often been made out to be. I find it impossible given the attitudes of homeschooling families and the literature and resources to which they refer to believe that homeschoolers are consistently gaining the social experience necessary to compliment their academic progress.
As per request, here's the Creation vs Evolution thread.
As per request, here's the Creation vs Evolution thread. I was already thinking about splitting these posts into a new thread anyway, since we seemed to have gone a little off-topic in the other thread. ![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)
Against Home schooling
Did you know that they, (ICR R.A.T.E. Project) have found C14 inside diamonds that supposedly formed 200 million years ago? C14 can only last 10,000 years at best. Why would there be any C14 left in diamonds after 200 million years?
Theodore has made at least a dozen attempts to provoke an answer from you for some of the most glaring problems with the Theory of Evolution. Could you please answer some of them with evidence?
Thanks,
Michael
Did you know that they, (ICR R.A.T.E. Project) have found C14 inside diamonds that supposedly formed 200 million years ago? C14 can only last 10,000 years at best. Why would there be any C14 left in diamonds after 200 million years?
Theodore has made at least a dozen attempts to provoke an answer from you for some of the most glaring problems with the Theory of Evolution. Could you please answer some of them with evidence?
Thanks,
Michael
Last edited by Michael T on Sat Apr 08, 2006 6:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
One more thing...
Here is a short article from Dave Hunt.
The question arises then, if evolution is so solidly proven, what are
evolutionists afraid of? Why must evolution be protected from scrutiny? Why must students be shielded from other views? Why not present all the
pertinent facts and encourage the students to think critically, as a good
scientist should? Would this not be a good educational technique? Would this not produce better citizens and scientists?
Evolutionists purport that there is no real science supporting intelligent
design, that ID is just religion, or at least a "backdoor" to religion. But
the facts are that many secular scientists, through observation and
experimentation and based on the scientific evidence and data they've
obtained, have come to the conclusion that life has been designed, not
created by mere chance from nothing.
Science involves conducting research, using the scientific method in various disciplines, and reporting on the data and results. There's no religion in the facts [such as] recently discovered groundbreaking evidence about rock dating, carbon-14 in diamonds, excess helium within zircons, and other geologic data supporting a young earth . . . . this science [should] be available for scrutiny by critical thinkers -- that students, specifically, are able to evaluate the evidence and formulate their own beliefs If the science points to a designer, so be it. But if the evidence suggests otherwise, which we're sure it does not, then so be it. Let the chips fall where they may.
Perhaps evolutionists' avoidance of these kinds of data exposes a basic
insecurity in their position . . . . evolution cannot stand the test of
science -- it must avoid the light of open inquiry. Only by limiting the
debate can evolutionists hope to maintain their monopoly on education. Yet, it serves us well to recognize that the debate involves a deeper issue than just control of academic content. If evolutionists admit that science does indeed support intelligent design, then they are admitting that there is a possibility of a Creator. Perhaps what evolutionists are truly afraid of are the implications of the presence of a higher power. Higher power means higher authority and, ultimately, higher accountability.
The question arises then, if evolution is so solidly proven, what are
evolutionists afraid of? Why must evolution be protected from scrutiny? Why must students be shielded from other views? Why not present all the
pertinent facts and encourage the students to think critically, as a good
scientist should? Would this not be a good educational technique? Would this not produce better citizens and scientists?
Evolutionists purport that there is no real science supporting intelligent
design, that ID is just religion, or at least a "backdoor" to religion. But
the facts are that many secular scientists, through observation and
experimentation and based on the scientific evidence and data they've
obtained, have come to the conclusion that life has been designed, not
created by mere chance from nothing.
Science involves conducting research, using the scientific method in various disciplines, and reporting on the data and results. There's no religion in the facts [such as] recently discovered groundbreaking evidence about rock dating, carbon-14 in diamonds, excess helium within zircons, and other geologic data supporting a young earth . . . . this science [should] be available for scrutiny by critical thinkers -- that students, specifically, are able to evaluate the evidence and formulate their own beliefs If the science points to a designer, so be it. But if the evidence suggests otherwise, which we're sure it does not, then so be it. Let the chips fall where they may.
Perhaps evolutionists' avoidance of these kinds of data exposes a basic
insecurity in their position . . . . evolution cannot stand the test of
science -- it must avoid the light of open inquiry. Only by limiting the
debate can evolutionists hope to maintain their monopoly on education. Yet, it serves us well to recognize that the debate involves a deeper issue than just control of academic content. If evolutionists admit that science does indeed support intelligent design, then they are admitting that there is a possibility of a Creator. Perhaps what evolutionists are truly afraid of are the implications of the presence of a higher power. Higher power means higher authority and, ultimately, higher accountability.
Sustainable oil?
Somewhat unrelated, but still interesting, is an article on how oil is most likely produced by methane being heated between the mantle and the crust:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/artic ... E_ID=38645
If this is true, then you don't need millions of years of dead animal and plant deposits to account for all that oil.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/artic ... E_ID=38645
If this is true, then you don't need millions of years of dead animal and plant deposits to account for all that oil.
-
- User
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 2:03 pm
- Location: Kincaid, WV
I am a Christian, as many homeschooling families are, but I am also a big believer in evolution. There is proof of evolution, proof which I do not believe to be tampered with. I went to school with a girl (which was only about 5 years ago) who was a strict, Baptist and her family had taught her that there was nothing before "Creation" as told in Genesis. According to her and many other Christians, Dinosaurs, neanderthals, Cro-magnum never existed. This is a conspiracy... made by the government to put an end to the bible or something. What no one puts into consideration is the fact the Genesis was written more than 3000 years ago, long before man was doing any sort of archiological wonders. For man of that time, it was uncomprehensible that the sun was the center of the universe... or even that there was a universe. I respect everyone's beliefs and would NEVER tell someone that they are wrong, persay, but I do think that some people need to stop taking the bible so literally. If you were do follow the Old Testiment as devoutly as some do Genesis is particular (and sometimes exclusively) you would not have Christianity but Orthodox Judism, as they are the original authors of the Old Testiment.
Amie and Sophie
Which parts?
Hi,
I am curious as to which parts of the Bible that you do take literally? If you don't mind me asking.
It's not about conspiracy for me, I think there is enough evidence against evolution for them to at least come up with a better theory. That would just be good science.
Would you like to hear some of that evidence?
I am curious as to which parts of the Bible that you do take literally? If you don't mind me asking.
It's not about conspiracy for me, I think there is enough evidence against evolution for them to at least come up with a better theory. That would just be good science.
Would you like to hear some of that evidence?
Christianity and evolution?
It is possible to believe in evolution and be a christian, however it is very hard to teach that practice. When a Child sees that you don't believe the whole Bible, they get confused. How can you take Christ's death on the cross literaly if you don't believe Him when He talks about things that happened in Genesis literally?
Mar 13:19 " For those days shall be tribulation, such as there hath not been the like from the beginning of the creation which God created until now, and never shall be. "
If you can't believe what Jesus said, how can you believe He died for you? I am not trying to be mean or argumentative, I just don't understand how it works?
Mar 13:19 " For those days shall be tribulation, such as there hath not been the like from the beginning of the creation which God created until now, and never shall be. "
If you can't believe what Jesus said, how can you believe He died for you? I am not trying to be mean or argumentative, I just don't understand how it works?
Phi 4:13 I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me.
-
- User
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 2:03 pm
- Location: Kincaid, WV
I don't think God and evolution are mutually exclusive at all. And I do take a good portion of the bible at literal, but it was the way back then to talk quite a bit in metaphorical speech. Depending on which denomination of Christian church you attend, you will receive completely different interpretations of many parts of the bible, and that was mainly my point behind the literal comment. I was raised Roman Catholic, with all the ceremony and numerous holidays, especially at this time of year. For a while, my husband and I attended a small church in our home town, a Freewill Baptist. They made MANY comments on how most Catholic holidays are just pagan holidays remade, Palm Sunday and Easter being their main focus. I was pretty astonished, considering Palm Sunday is symbolic of Jesus entering Jerusalem and being greeted by children with palm fronds and that Easter is the celebration of Jesus' resurrection.
I don't have a problem with the creation story at all, in fact I believe something akin to that did happen, but by the time that portion of the bible was recorded, it was probably little more than a family story passed down through generations. We cannot forget that while the bible is the word of God, it was recorded by man, and there is no man alive or dead who did not make mistakes.
I also grew up in Boston MA, and went to the science museum quite often. I cannot remember if it was an actual part of the museum or a temporary exhibit, but at one point I saw the skeleton of a neanderthal woman, nicknamed Lucy. I have since then seen many documentaries, for both sides of the argument, and still completely agree with evolution. I do not think we came from monkeys, but rather simply started out as a less modern form of man. Who can say that God didn't create man as a neanderthal and gave us the power to evolve on our own. After all, look at how much more we know now, in comparison to 2000 years ago when Jesus walked this earth.
I have seen a few shows concerning the human and dinosaur foot prints that were found on the same layer of fossilized mud. I agree that it is strange, but we don't know all that much about our natural history, despite how scientists like to pretend we do. A fish that was thought to be extinct since the time of dinosaurs was found not too long ago off the coast of Madagascar. Perhaps there was still some remnants of dinosaur life wandering about when man was created... we just don't know... but I really don't think we should just throw out the idea of evolution.
I don't have a problem with the creation story at all, in fact I believe something akin to that did happen, but by the time that portion of the bible was recorded, it was probably little more than a family story passed down through generations. We cannot forget that while the bible is the word of God, it was recorded by man, and there is no man alive or dead who did not make mistakes.
I also grew up in Boston MA, and went to the science museum quite often. I cannot remember if it was an actual part of the museum or a temporary exhibit, but at one point I saw the skeleton of a neanderthal woman, nicknamed Lucy. I have since then seen many documentaries, for both sides of the argument, and still completely agree with evolution. I do not think we came from monkeys, but rather simply started out as a less modern form of man. Who can say that God didn't create man as a neanderthal and gave us the power to evolve on our own. After all, look at how much more we know now, in comparison to 2000 years ago when Jesus walked this earth.
I have seen a few shows concerning the human and dinosaur foot prints that were found on the same layer of fossilized mud. I agree that it is strange, but we don't know all that much about our natural history, despite how scientists like to pretend we do. A fish that was thought to be extinct since the time of dinosaurs was found not too long ago off the coast of Madagascar. Perhaps there was still some remnants of dinosaur life wandering about when man was created... we just don't know... but I really don't think we should just throw out the idea of evolution.
Amie and Sophie
Return to “Religious Discussion / Topics”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 36 guests