Posted on 08/05/2009 11:15:25 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Today’s top-selling biology textbooks present evolution as the only scientific view of the history of life. Often these textbooks use faulty or deceptive evidences to support evolutionary ideas. Fortunately, students can easily equip themselves with free materials that dissect textbooks and reveal the truth...
(Excerpt) Read more at answersingenesis.org ...
Please explain the intelligence of creating the horsehair worm?
So that liberals would eventually expose themselves on FR with silly questions.
No other purpose or reason.
But that’s just enough.
If you can't answer the question, just ignore it.
Considering that most of those never made it to the biology class teaching about evolution, it would be hard pressed to make your argument that teaching evolution was responsible for this.
I read the latter two books but not the first. I can’t say I was too impressed by those books.
If I ever get my hands on the first book I’d read it anyway, but I probably wouldn’t buy it. Besides, I have read works by most of the people he interviews in that book, so I doubt I’d see anything new.
If that assertion is true, then countries that don't teach evolution should be doing considerably better than we are, so we can test the assertion by comparing their academic and scientific accomplishments to ours.
Do you have any countries where evolution isn't taught that you would like to add to the list for comparison?
So your point with the quotes is... what? That there are those that see a conflict between Darwinism and Christianity? You hardly needed to pull out a quote from 1880 to show that, I’m talking to several people right now on FR that believe that, if you haven’t noticed.
Science was just fine when men like Newton, Copernicus, Pasteur, Mendel, etc, believed that an orderly God created an orderly universe which could be studied in a rational way.
Those concepts of Christianity, which didn't exist in the world of animism which is what you're really describing, is what allowed those believers to lay the foundation of most of modern science.
Can you name a single dozen, and show me this alleged evidence?
I was going to say *Nice try* but it’s really a rather anemic and pathetic attempt to make the average public school student look better by AGAIN misrepresenting creationists.
Evos really ought to quit making assumptions about others because of what it makes them look like.
The 1530 score didn’t include the 600 for the new writing section that most colleges are ignoring now anyway because they’re finding out it’s no accurate indicator of student performance after all.
So, no, the 1530 is out of the 1600 on the two sections that are usually represented, not your ridiculous attempt to denigrate it.
It’s fairly telling what the evos agenda really is when they come on these threads and immediately turn them into Christian/creationist bashing screeds instead of actually addressing the topic posted.
While reading this thread and trying to decipher tpanther’s point through his screeching, I’m still not clear what he’s asking for.
Well aptly named...whattajoke...
Actually, it wasn’t me asking for anything, other than projecto-illogic to put up or shut up, per usual...unsurprisingly, your continual self-absorbed projections have polluted your brain so much you get even the most pedestrian of cerebral functions wrong.
The crux of the matter is you loons hung up with God in one or many/multiple/myriad way(s) or another, keep whining that nothing can be scientific when it comes to origins and life except evolution and if one somehow is exposed to ID/creationism/intelligence...then ironically children are somehow going to wind up scientifically “dumb”er than their peers.
Despite Metmom, and dozens of others illustrating this simply is not true by evidence of the facts: U.S. children out-performing their peers at home or private school when they’re exposed to evolution AND ID/creationism; AND that before God was booted out of ALL public school classes, kids performed better, etc. etc. etc., you evo-cult-loons still parrot the same tired nonsense, over and over and over and over again.
Is it that you’re seriously that indoctrinated, or is it that eventually your handlers told you sooner or later the point would somehow be ceded?
Soooo anyway, silly projecto-illogic thinks somehow by equating backwards muslim “creationist” countries locked into the 7th century with U.S. students present-day learning ID and ID only (nevermind there’s just no such thing as that here in this country, for the most part, and just you Einstein’s nevermind no one here is calling for NOT teaching evolution, but rather teaching BOTH, also posted hundreds of times to you loons on here) are somehow going to be more backwards scientifically than any evolution only indoctrinated children in this country.
It’s a pointless exercise, but that’s the jist of projecto-illogic’s perview on here, obfuscate and obstruct due to his morbidly untenable position.
It’s all you loons have.
So now I see you’ve chmed in with what?
Nigeria and Angola? Do you have sources or just...the typical liberal poo flinging...
anyway...I’ll raise you loons Atlanta and...L.A. ;)
All great thinkers that you listed. Unfortunate that they were each persecuted by the church for their efforts. Although Mendel did have the initial sanction of the monastery to conduct his pea plant experiments, the church did not like the genetics aspects and destroyed several of his unpublished works after his death. Shame. He was brilliant.
“By all means let creation science be taught in schools. It should take all of about 10 minuets to teach it and then children can be allowed to make up their own minds in the face of the evidence. For children who study hard and keep an open mind it seems to me utterly inconceivable that they could conclude anything other than that evolution is true” ~ Richard Dawkins
http://www.scribd.com/doc/6230199/Articles-of-Richard-Dawkins
Well, thinking that monkeys change into people by accident and that everyone is a fortuitous meat-byproduct of mindless processes, is not much of an improvement.
He knows I was talking pre-1960’s...before the “me” generation hateful of God hi-jacked education...you know the trip to the moon science...and when we didn’t yank kids out of the womb by bashing their skulls in in the 3rd trimester because well, they really aren’t people yet...
you know, THOSE flat earth dark ages.
But pre-NEA, PC, hate-God lunatic secualr humanist science period to all liberals means flat earth, because most of them don’t know a world we’re talking about (they’re angry 13 year olds Mommy and Daddy named moonbeam and grew up indoctrinated afterward) OR they’re old enough but seriously don’t see the problems with liberals hi-jacking science because they participated!
“Your search - projectoillogic - did not match any documents”.
I’m the original author!
Perhaps one day we’ll all three be famous...obvious for the two of us, but you....well, YOU will stick out for being particularly dull.
Scientific Proof and the Debate Between Evolution and Creationism
Understanding how science works also is critical to understanding the seemingly never-ending debate between those who support evolution and those who support creationism. The debate typically devolves (no pun intended!) into the argument by creationists that scientists cannot prove that evolution has occurred; therefore, their hypotheses of creationism are equally valid. Hypotheses regarding numerous aspects of evolution have been posed and tested. As testing has winnowed out incorrect ones, our understanding has become ever more clear. As with electrons, knowledge of the precise nature of evolution will undergo constant refinement, but the total current weight of scientific evidence supports the existence of evolution. As scientists, we do not arrive at that conclusion out of capriciousness or because of a “leap of faith,” but rather because of the systematic process for understanding physical reality called the scientific method. In fact, anyone who supports evolution because of faith or belief is not using scientific rationality.
Several arguments posed by creationists do constitute hypotheses and therefore are falsifiable. The hypothesis that the Earth is no more than 10,000 years old has been proposed numerous times, but refuted in many ways. Conversely, alternative hypotheses that the Earth is much older have been repeatedly supported. Indeed, today the weight of evidence overwhelmingly suggests that the Earth is billions of years old. Unfortunately, many other arguments posed by creationists are not falsifiable and therefore cannot be addressed using scientific inquiry. How can we falsify the hypothesis that God or an Intelligent Designer created the major forms of life on Earth? Creationist theories that cannot be refuted represent a particular world view, but they are not science. These theories can be taught in schools as philosophy or religion, but they must not be taught as science, unless the instructor uses them to demonstrate to the class what is and what is not science.
http://agbiosafety.unl.edu/science.shtml
One of the very few that you didn't lift from some creationist's website ...
I’ve posted test results from homeschoolers plenty of times, and by and large, homeschoolers are Christians who teach their kids both because they teach their kids to THINK.
That’s what gives them the advantage.
You can blow it off as anecdotal, which I expect, but evos don’t even have that much to go on to support the contention that not teaching creation but only evolution gives public school kids an advantage in science education. There is NOTHING that evos have to support that.
sorry link was embedded and disappeared in the post.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.