Skip to comments.Darwin teaching 'divides opinion'
Posted on 10/26/2009 6:51:16 AM PDT by LondonCathy
More than half of adults in a survey of 10 countries thought school science lessons should teach evolutionary theories alongside creationism.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.bbc.co.uk ...
OK then.. Scary.
Newbie isn’t necessarily a derogatory phrase, it has gotten old hat, like a slap on the back. A lot of established members like it when someone posts articles to add a comment simply to know this isn’t a bot dumping articles or a blog pimp. Don’t take it personally, it is just part of the culture around here.
Welcome by the way.
Wow, 50% of God creation has not evolved into Neandrathalic knuckle dragging evolutionists.
I think there’s room for both evolutionary theory and creationism in school.
In science class, evolutionary theory should take priority with at least some thought given to creationism. Creationism really belongs more in social studies classrooms since its a widely held belief.
Those who want to remove either from school are unworthy of argument.
Do you suppose that I came to bring peace to the world? No, not peace, but division.
It’s all in the way material is presented.
If the material is presented as an example of “The Scientific Method” - in other words, quantify, qualify, identify, specify. The whole Who, What, Where, Why, When and How. Postulate theories, prove or disprove them. Then there is no problem with most people. The problem is, virtually no science teachers are informed enough on Evolution to teach it in this manner. Instead, it becomes the PC attack on Religion - which it certainly does not have to be.
Consider, there is a KT layer; perhaps God planned that Dinosaurs were here for a separate purpose (Oil, Coal, Natural Gas). Then after God elininated the Dinosaurs, he placed Man on earth.
Your particular post... better to get the popcorn out and watch the ensuing crevo war.
Hope your asbestos underwear is up to date.
Starting another evo thread,....well, we have plenty of those. Welcome anyway.
You say it's scary to teach ID with evolution, and I think most people would ask why it would scare an evo if he was sure of his theory? If we are both looking for true science, then why be threatened? There are many problems with Darwin, they should be looked at. Otherwise, Darwinism becomes a religion. It doesn't have to be ID that contests the evo theory, but any alternative explanation that actually works. Why should some guy from Cambridge force one theory down all of our throats, and 6 weeks or 6 months later, the guy at Oxford proves him wrong? In fact most evo's don't even believe Darwin anymore, they just hold him up as a religious figure in their anti God movement. Being anti God doesn't make Darwin the only explanation. We have evo's that reject God and then tell you it all started with space aliens.
Oh wait, God is from somewhere else, and He could be considered alien, I suppose.
Those who want to remove either from school are unworthy of argument."
The way the question is usually phrased is "Should religion be put on an equal footing with evolution in public schools?"
The real answer is, Only if the religion you choose is the right one.
What that means is, that in order to have an apples/apples comparison, you'd need a religion which operates on an intellectual level similar to that of evolution, and the only real candidates are going to be Voodoo, Rastafari, and Santaria.
Rastafari in particular would fit particularly well into several kinds of public school team-teaching scenarios, e.g. a science teacher looking for a way to put 30 teenagers into a suitable frame of mind for being indoctrinated into something as stupid as evolutionism could walk across the hall to the Rasta class for a box of spliffs...
Many are asking how oil is being found 6-8 miles deep, and on top of mountains. The upheaval of the crust would have had to be unthinkable. More oil is being found every day and at greater depth than ever in more diverse places. I believe the new discovery in Brazil is over 10 miles deep?( not sure) If the pool is large and deep, why is it so deep and there are no fossil records that deep? Maybe oil has been here all along and was formed with the earth's other minerals as it cooled. Just sayin "they" are looking at other reasons for oil than just dino's.
You ask some very legitimate questions. And I wish I were smart enough to answer them, or even postulate something intelligent in response. Hydrocarbons, are by their very nature flammable - so one would think that any volcanic activity would result in some pretty big fires and explosions. Minerals do not create Carbon and hyrdogen bonds; as they tend to be different elements altogether.
We are pretty sure that coal is formed by compresssed vegetation, pressure and time. We have assumed that oil is more of the same - just ‘different’.
My only idea for oil being found so deep, is that any liquid will run or seep downhill; and it will also flow from a high pressure area to a lower pressure area. I do know, from personal experience that an oil well that is a good producer can go completely dead because a subterrainian earthquake shifted the pressure of the resevior to another area. Conversely, ‘dead’ wells have become producers after a minor quake as well.
The world is a big place. The earth’s average temperature used to be approximately 72-77; such that much of the world was a giant rainforest - that will make huge populations of both vegetation as well as dinosaurs. We know that the earth did not always look like it does now.
Half a billion years of single and small multicell carcases building up 2 mile deep sediments probably was the source of most of it.
Hardly matters since neither is taught in school.
Your scenario would mean that the earth would be covered in oil. No place would be without oil. A 2 mile deep pile of carcases would make us drown in oil. There are unanswered questions and anomalies with your assumptions.
One good thing about your theory is we could kill all the Chinese and make enough oil from the bodies to run for many years. A billion or so bodies converted to oil would save the polar bears for a few more years. Kinda a win win don't ya know. The UN could decide who lives and who dies. Finally the UN has a usefull purpose.
Did you work really hard to be that ignorant, or does it come naturally?
Answer what, the debunked crap you seemed to have pulled out of a southern bodily orifice?
Now that’s funny.
You misjudgme me entirely and it’s now becoming annoying that I am still, apparently, obliged to fight this “newbie” tag.
Indeed, I have no time for Creationism and its lack of sense.
More importantly, I am today sitting, frustrated, at my laptop with a nephew in Helmand as part of Wellington’s ill-served legacy wondering how our Mr Brown is likely to respond to the news that yet further British blood is being spilled while he dallies with the One (as I believe this forum may have dubbed him..). The news just in that a further 8 young Americans have needlessly died in that particular (Afghanistan) country does nothing to alleviate my spirits. I am on your side my friend. Do stop laying into me please.
You say you have no time for "Creationism" well, fine I didn't mention it except to say we shouldn't withhold reasonable arguments from our children. Denying a Creator doesn't mean there wasn't one. If Darwin can't stand on merit, then why teach a fantasy? You don't have to believe the Bible to see flaws in Darwin's theory. The question was "why not teach ALL knowledge" on the subject? I, for one, don't want my daughter to become some sort of a robot spewing memorized claptrap without exploring the truth about a subject.
Thank you for your service. I'm not "laying into you". I'm having a discussion. God bless you.