Although Buckingham describes himself as a born-again Christian and believes in creationism, “This is not an attempt to impose my views on anyone else,” he said.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6470259/

Then he goes on to force teachers in the schools to teach creationism disguised as “intelligent design”. I am so sick of this sh!t. There is NO evidence to support creationism people, its not an acceptable theory of our origin for our children to be taught in PUBLIC schools. Why can't they just keep it to Sunday school and allow their children to learn the facts as they are and not what we want them to be. I understand that the faithful like to pretend evolution is still a completely baseless theory so they can retain belief that creationism is the answer, but with only the facts to go on, evolution is the only fact based theory we have. Some people hear the word "theory" and automatically think that it means its an underdeveloped idea that was just dreamed up out of thin air. It isn't. Its the collection of all the evidence we have of our human origins and what we think that means. Its a theory maybe, but its the best way to continue our exploration of human/life origins. Lets remember that "relativity" is a "theory", "quantum physics" is a "theory", and so is "nuclear fission".

OK thumpers, fire away. Tell me all about how a religious belief belongs in our public school curriculum even though its merely a religious belief unsupported by any facts over the history of scientific scrutiny.

[This message has been edited by connecticutFIERO (edited 11-13-2004).]

Oh God, here we go.

quote Originally posted by Toddster: Oh God, here we go.

Why can't people check their religious fundamentalism at the door when they enter public service? Be a person of faith, not a fundamentalist activist that forces FAITH on the public? IS that SO hard to do? I don't make children learn my theory on the universe, I would never even think of it. We have facts, lets use them to our advantage, not discount them because of what we learned in Sunday school.

[This message has been edited by connecticutFIERO (edited 11-13-2004).]

quote Originally posted by connecticutFIERO: There is NO evidence to support creationism people, its not an acceptable theory of our origin for our children to be taught in PUBLIC schools.......... ......I understand that the faithful like to pretend evolution is still a completely baseless theory so they can retain belief that creationism is the answer, but with only the facts to go on, evolution is the only fact based theory we have...... ......Some people hear the word "theory" and automatically think that it means its an underdeveloped idea that was just dreamed up out of thin air. It isn't. Its the collection of all the evidence we have of our human origins and what we think that means. Its a theory maybe, but its the best way to continue our exploration of human/life origins. Lets remember that "relativity" is a "theory", "quantum physics" is a "theory", and so is "nuclear fission".

I can appreciate your concern. Education is vital to our future.
A theory is an idea based on presumptions, to be put to task by scientific experimentation, to develope facts. Creationism is a theory and yes unproven. Evolution is also a theory, also unproven. If evolution were proven, it would not be a theory. What proof or facts can you forward which proves evolution? Prove to us that a cell became a fish which evolved into a monkey whic evolved into man. Further more, show me a pattern which would suggest what we will evolve into next. The theory of relativity was a theory. It is no longer. It is fact. As is nuclear fission.

quote Originally posted by connecticutFIERO: I don't make children learn my theory on the universe, I would never even think of it.

It does seem as though you are doing exactly that !

quote Originally posted by Toddster: Oh God, here we go.

Here we go !

BIG difference between a theory and a religious belief. A theory is supported by facts and evidence. In this particular case, evolution, we do not have all the answers. Yet thats the beauty of it. We aren't trying to fir square pegs into round holes, its still an open book awaiting new evidence that will add to the case for evolution. In the case of creation, there is no facts or evidence whatsoever to evenform a theory. Its just faith in the word of God in the bible, which is subject to nothing but belief in something without being curious. To be curious about creation is to question its merits, and in turn, question faith and God. Thats the problem. Its only a belief. It wasn't formed through evidence or facts. Its only words in a book without scrutiny. Thats up to the individual to accept that belief. But we should not being teaching religious belief in schools, merely because all the facts aren't in for the case of evolution. Evolution is a theory for sure, a fact and evidence based theory built on our best thinkers findings.

If given a choice to find a pot of gold by either looking at your environment around you for clues, or to accept faith that the pot of gold is at the end of the rainbow, which would you choose? Lets say you find a trail of old gold dust that leads all in one direction, but may throw you a curve here and there. The other path says the gold is in the other direction, and that the gold dust trail is nothing more than a "theory" that should be discounted simply because it isn't completely irrefutable. One can give you solid evidence in support of finding your gold, and the other leads down a path that has no support of evidence, but it gives you the comfort of being certain in an uncertain situation.

[This message has been edited by connecticutFIERO (edited 11-13-2004).]

quote Originally posted by connecticutFIERO:

quote Originally posted by Toddster: Oh God, here we go.

No we don't . What a piece of work. His link actually shoots him down.
conneticutfiero, is that all you got ? C'mon, you promised us a fight !

Edit
Okay, here we go.

[This message has been edited by cliffw (edited 11-13-2004).]

quote Originally posted by cliffw: No we don't . What a piece of work. His link actually shoots him down. conneticutfiero, is that all you got ? C'mon, you promised us a fight !

How does the link shoot anything down? I don't get it.

I am simply saying... Look I understand you may believe something that helps you in your life. That belief may even be a popular belief, but lets be realistic here and keep our schools curriculum based on evidence, not popular religious belief. If 99 people believe the moon is made of cheese and the other 1 person believes the moon is rock, because evidence supports that the moon is rock and not cheese, lets not pick the popular version because people "believe" it.

[This message has been edited by connecticutFIERO (edited 11-13-2004).]

creationists only find evolution objectionable because it contradicts a literal interpretation of the timeline for creation in genesis.

ok, how about this. where does gravity come from? wouldn't god have to have caused that too? but nobody questions gravity, or asserts that god has to sit there all the time sucking sparrows toward the center of mass. no timeline, no conflict with genesis, no problem.

creationism belongs in only one place in public schools, in Comparative Religion class, along with all the other creation stories. you know, the turtle, the giant space chicken, etc. those who want to send their kids to religious schools to avoid evolution are welcome to do so, but their kids will have to deal with funny looks when they get out in the real world. feel free to teach your religion (judaeo-christianity) at church or at home, but not in the public schools.

quote Originally posted by lurker: creationism belongs in only one place in public schools, in Comparative Religion class, along with all the other creation stories. you know, the turtle, the giant space chicken, etc. those who want to send their kids to religious schools to avoid evolution are welcome to do so, but their kids will have to deal with funny looks when they get out in the real world. feel free to teach your religion (judaeo-christianity) at church or at home, but not in the public schools.

EXACTLY!

I don't have a problem with teaching creation, as long as it's taught as one theory.
The problem with evolution is that it supposes that nature will progress from a lesser organized, simple form to a more complex, more organized form. That goes direcly against the Second Law of Thermodynamics and entropy. Yet, there are explainations that say there are "exceptions" or "obstructions" to the 2nd Law that allow life to exist.

There are still many unanswered questions about evolution. Too many for you to automatically throw out all other theories as religious nonsense. There is historical evidence that at least parts of the Bible are true and accurate reflections of history. There are still many holes in "proving" creation, as well. Why is one theory - one UNPROVEN theory - automatically better than the other, when there is factual evidence to support both?

Can someone please explain to me how evolution is a more valid theory than intelligent design? Please use facts and evidence.

Also, please give a clear explanation of which is more likely from a statistical standpoint; spontaneous random appearance, or creation for purpose.

------------------

My Web page | The Turbo Super Duty Build.

quote Originally posted by FastIndyFiero: Can someone please explain to me how evolution is a more valid theory than intelligent design? Please use facts and evidence. Also, please give a clear explanation of which is more likely from a statistical standpoint; spontaneous random appearance, or creation for purpose.

Go do some homework. This isn't meant to be a discussion of the merits of the two, its crystal clear which is supported by evidence. There really is no question as to which one is scientifically sound, even without all the evidence. One is based on evidence from the world around us, the other is based on a narrow interpretation of the bible. Evidence and facts can be proven, the bible is a moral guide to life based on faith in the almighty which is self fullfilling because faith means you don't need proof. Genius actually. Its like a circle of illogical logic.

quote Originally posted by connecticutFIERO: BIG difference between a theory and a religious belief. A theory is supported by facts and evidence. In this particular case, evolution, we do not have all the answers. Yet thats the beauty of it. We aren't trying to fir square pegs into round holes, its still an open book awaiting new evidence that will add to the case for evolution. In the case of creation, there is no facts or evidence whatsoever to evenform a theory. Its just faith in the word of God in the bible, which is subject to nothing but belief in something without being curious. To be curious about creation is to question its merits, and in turn, question faith and God. Thats the problem. Its only a belief. It wasn't formed through evidence or facts. Its only words in a book without scrutiny. Thats up to the individual to accept that belief. But we should not being teaching religious belief in schools, merely because all the facts aren't in for the case of evolution. Evolution is a theory for sure, a fact and evidence based theory built on our best thinkers findings. If given a choice to find a pot of gold by either looking at your environment around you for clues, or to accept faith that the pot of gold is at the end of the rainbow, which would you choose? Lets say you find a trail of old gold dust that leads all in one direction, but may throw you a curve here and there. The other path says the gold is in the other direction, and that the gold dust trail is nothing more than a "theory" that should be discounted simply because it isn't completely irrefutable. One can give you solid evidence in support of finding your gold, and the other leads down a path that has no support of evidence, but it gives you the comfort of being certain in an uncertain situation.

Let me first point out the fallicies (non facts) with your first post.
William Buckingham did not go on to force anything on the schools. It was voted on by the board of education whic was voted to the board by the citizens of Pennsilvania ( not Connetticut btw ). In fact, your link is not alluding to the teaching of creationism as being the way life began.
You say it is an unacceptable theory of our origin for our children to be taught in PUBLIC schools. A belief not shared by the public school board or the voters of Pa.
You wish for the children to be taught the facts as they are. What facts are you dreaming of ? Your link cites a disclaimer by the Atlanta school system informing students that evolution is a theory, not a fact. Hmmmmm.....
You call evolution the only fact based theory we have. Again, you have given us no facts. It used to be thought fact that the Earth was flat. When it was "theroized" that it was round, people such as those who could only consider their own views, such as you are doing now, scorned those who that turned out to be right. Those which considered other things were possible allowed man to progress. Hmmmmm.......
The school system in your link, recognizing evolution as only a theory, unsupported by any facts, is just allowing another theory to be forwarded for consideration, not removing the theory of evolution. You wish for the seperation of church and state. So do I. Your religious beliefs should not dictate what is taught in school either.
Your link goes on to report two board members who resigned over the boards decision. We will not get into the fact that they were husband and wife (WTF). The reasons these board members gave for resignation were..... (let me see if I can cut and paste them)....
*quote*
“We have a vocal group within the community who feel very strongly in an evangelical Christian way that there is no separation of church and state,” Carol Brown said. “Our responsibility to is to represent the viewpoints of all members of the community.” *unquote* By resigning, they failed to do their duty to represent those which did not agree with their views. Good ridance. Your fight is with them connetticutfiero.
OK, I feel like I am fighting a shadow but let me get on with it.
According to your differences between theories and religious beliefs, evolution is a religion.
?Given a choice to find gold at the end of a rainbow? WTF? Faith or looking at the environment? Faith in what? Because someone said there was? That is what they are saying about evolution. Ther is no fact, none.
I believe in creationism not because I believe in God. Even in evolution the first thing which some say evolved had to be created.
Let me ask you this. Which came first ? The chicken or the egg?

Evolution has facts to support it. They even found evidence of the big bang (ripples).. How can you teach creation? I still don't understand that.. "God said let there be light, and there was" "A rib popped out and turned into a women".. There is no reason for that even be a theory, except for one book, which has numerous stories which have been disproven (flat earth, 6000 years, etc, etc)..

Maybe you didn't read my post about popular belief not equating correct belief. I don't care if the people of PA voted to have creation taught in school. Its unconstitutional and wrong. Seperation means just that, seperate. Religion is not based in facts or science. Its a moral road map. It doesn't belong on the curriculum. Atlanta is another case of creationists trying to etch their views into the school system. That is not a good example to refer this case to. If the people wanted to teach their children that the moon is made out of cheese, and they voted on it, would that make it right? Not to mention that this isn't what happened. It was introduced by one board member with support from a majority of the others.

"The revision was spearheaded by school board member William Buckingham, who heads the board’s curriculum committee."

I didn't see anything about a public vote.

Two members of the board actually resigned their positions in protest. Just because there was a vote held by mostly Christian board members, that does not make it right.

Cliff those two members resigned in protest because they were out voted by Evangelicals. What else were they supposed to do? They couldn't strike the measure down, so they had to make a point.

Obviously you don't understand Evolution by the way you describe it as not supported by facts, by the way you think life had to be created at some point to evolve, and also by comparing it to a religion. You can believe what you want, but when it comes to world accepted scientific theory, you are in the wrong, and those are the facts my friend. Don't confuse religious belief with scientific study.

Once again, I don't need to make the case for Evolution. It is already accepted as the correct path to study for Scientific study of life origins. This debate isn't about proving Evolution is irrefutable to you.

[This message has been edited by connecticutFIERO (edited 11-13-2004).]

Well guys since I am a Science teacher I am going to offer my two cents on this one. Why should we force any beliefs on anyone. Why is it so hard to teach both veiws of the existance of humanity to children, and let them make an informed decision on their own. I myself am a christian but I teach both views in my Science class.
I think that everybodys rights should be respected. If people want to believe that we evolved, or if they want to believe we were created, that is their right. Why should we say that only evolution can be taught. Evolution and creation are both theories, and it is not fair to EVERYBODY to only teach one. I personally feel that the only rights that are being violated are the christians of this country. If a christian child wants to pray or have a moment of silence at school, and the kid beside of him does not believe in it, why can't that child just respect the right of the christian child to pray. That is not forcing anything on anybody, its just basic common respect that our nation has lost.
At my school Thursday morning during the pledge several kids were laughing and talking. When it was over I warned them about respecting others. They said "I don't believe in saying the pledge", and I told them fine then respect the people that do. Why is that so hard for people to understand. It is not violating rights of people for them to just stand silent while somebody does something they believe in. However, it is a violation of a persons rights when they are told that they can't honor their country or their God because it might offend others.
Believe in whatever you want to believe in, teach your children whatever you want them to believe, but just don't disrespect others in this process. I think if you would see what is happening to our society because of the lack of respect/morals today that you would be horrified. I have seen more things happen in the 8th grade than I saw when I went to college just a few years ago. Usually the horrible things that happen are with the children that have never been to church. You can argue this point until you are blue in the face if you choose, but I live through it every day. I see things that would make you think twice about raising your children without God in their lives, and I just hope that we can get our schools on the right track. I feel that if public education keeps getting worse that we won't have public education in the near future. I believe at this rate we will only have private schools, and home schooling.
I am not beating the bible but something needs to change. If you want to raise your child without religeon that is your choice. However, please have enough sense to raise them with some respect for others that have different beliefs. We live in the land of the free, and I have a hard time understanding why we can't be respectful, and be greatful that we can believe what we choose. I also don't think that teaching creation is a violation of anybodys rights either. Forcing them to believe it would be giving them a punishment if they didn't. I was taught the theory of evolution in school, and my parents taught me about God and creation. It would be unfair to many children to only teach evolution because many children believe in creation. It is just as unfair to teach one as the other, and the only fair way is to teach both.

This might seem shocking to those that know me here, but I actually agree that religion (of all types) should be kept out of school.

That doesn't mean that you can't bring a bible to class, or wear a yamulka, or pray over your food, or have faith-based activities after classes on school grounds, but as far as science goes, let's leave it to science.

The parents who want their kids to believe in creationism should teach it to them long before they are in school, and as they continue through school, so that when questions of other belief systems and/or theories come out in school as fact/law, those children can understand the difference between the two beliefs.

As for the age old Creationism vs. Evolution, the biggest problem I see is that both sides seem to knee-jerk react to the surface of the other's belief/theory. (Evolutionists who don't think they are using Faith to believe in evolution are mistaken). On the surface, both might seem to have problems. The big problem is that we don't have all the answers, and won't be getting them anytime soon.

Creationists can say God created the earth, man and woman, etc, but HOW did he do it? Snap his fingers? Make them out of clay? The important thing about the scriptures is the message of the plan of salvation, not the science behind God's creations. (Make no mistake about it, god *does* use science and precision. It's in the whole universe.)

Evolutionists say life started spontaneously from primordial soup. They say animals mutate in leaps and bounds from one animal to another, creating speciation where none existed before. They point to the logic behind animal-adaptation and things like batesian mimicry to prove their point. The problem with proving evolution is that it happens on such a different scale than we can even comprehend that it's hard to really know all the answers. Where are the go-betweens? The animals that were halfway between one species and one they supposedly became? I admit it is one of the leading scientific explanations for the Why Are We Here question, but it is not the answer. It is just another step closer to that answer.

Cite all the factual and scientific data you want, but evolution is not a proven, it is a best-quess. And that's perfectly fine, because it's all we can do for now, but in school it needs to be taught that all science is a guess until it is proven a law. And Evolution is not a law. Simple as that.

I think that answering the question Why Are We Here will be answered one day, and when it does, we will all understand it and agree with it. "It was so obvious!" we might say. However, in the meantime, we are groping in the dark and trying to feel our way around. If we found an animal in the dark, and felt that it had four legs, claws on the end of the feet, fur, a tail, and pointy teeth, we might say "With the data that we have (and we have repeatable scientific results that there is fur on the animal, a tail, etc), we believe this animal is a cat." Imagine when the lights go on and it is really a ferret. That might be how Why Are We Here pans out.

So to make a long story short: Teach kids religion, values, and morals as they grow at home and at church, then provide them with a school environment where they realize there is diversity in the world, but that they themselves are no more "wrong" than anyone else. Then continue to answer their questions.

Just my opinion though, I could be wrong.

-Flamberge

conneticutFIERO: SEPERATE as a word does not exist. It is spelled SEPARATE. So you don't have seperation, but separation. Have you ever thought about using spell check?

[This message has been edited by Old Lar (edited 11-13-2004).]

quote Originally posted by connecticutFIERO: Go do some homework. This isn't meant to be a discussion of the merits of the two, its crystal clear which is supported by evidence. There really is no question as to which one is scientifically sound, even without all the evidence. One is based on evidence from the world around us, the other is based on a narrow interpretation of the bible. Evidence and facts can be proven, the bible is a moral guide to life based on faith in the almighty which is self fullfilling because faith means you don't need proof. Genius actually. Its like a circle of illogical logic.

Excuse me for not explaining. I have done my homework. I have given equal study time to both ideas, and I assure you, I am very well grounded in the claims of both, not to mention other hybrid theories. Are you? Which undeniable facts and proven aspects of evolution make you have faith in its theory? I do not believe creation because of my faith or religion. I came to the conclusion that I believe creation by the study of arguements supporting both sides, and applying a steady logic to both of those.

God created man to satisfy a need.
or
Evolution is true because God doesn't exist.

As far as creation being a narrow-minded interpretation of the Bible, I think it's your turn for the homework.

BTW, where did evolution come from? What decided its mechanism? If you believe in evolution, wouldn't it be safe to say that evolution created man?

quote Originally posted by Old Lar: conneticutFIERO: SEPERATE as a word does not exist. It is spelled SEPARATE. So you don't have seperation, but separation. Have you ever thought about using spell check?

With all due respect, what was the point of this point except to try and belittle?

quote Originally posted by JohnnyK: Evolution has facts to support it. They even found evidence of the big bang (ripples)..

Oh really ? Care to elaborate. Wouldn't the big bang be creationism??? Not the theory proposed by religious beliefs but surely not evolution.

quote Originally posted by connecticutFIERO: "The revision was spearheaded by school board member William Buckingham, who heads the board’s curriculum committee." I didn't see anything about a public vote. Two members of the board actually resigned their positions in protest. Just because there was a vote held by mostly Christian board members, that does not make it right. Cliff those two members resigned in protest because they were out voted by Evangelicals. Obviously you don't understand Evolution by the way you describe it as not supported by facts, by the way you think life had to be created at some point to evolve, and also by comparing it to a religion. You can believe what you want, but when it comes to world accepted scientific theory, you are in the wrong, and those are the facts my friend. Don't confuse religious belief with scientific study. Once again, I don't need to make the case for Evolution. It is already accepted as the correct path to study for Scientific study of life origins.

Whoever it was spearheaded by is of no concern to me. I will Google him in a little bit. I am not trying to endorse creationism as the origins of life. I am only proposing a fair and balanced teaching of the mystery of life. One can not presume one to be better than the other. They are both theories.
The members who resigned are now unable to represent the views of the community which disagrees. Not someone I would want in my corner representing me.
You say it is obvious I do not understand evolution. I am fair. Give me some scientific provable facts. Science is not just to support beliefs, it is also to shoot down beliefs.
Evolution is also a religious belief although the belief is that there is no God. Again, just a belief as is the existence of God.
You do need to make a case for evolution. By citing that it is accepted does not make it factual. Again, the Earth was flat was the accepted belief of scientific belief at one time. We dare not question whether there is or is not a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow ?

quote Originally posted by wvformula88: Well guys since I am a Science teacher I am going to offer my two cents on this one. Why should we force any beliefs on anyone. Why is it so hard to teach both veiws of the existance of humanity to children, and let them make an informed decision on their own. I myself am a christian but I teach both views in my Science class. I think that everybodys rights should be respected. If people want to believe that we evolved, or if they want to believe we were created, that is their right. Why should we say that only evolution can be taught. Evolution and creation are both theories, and it is not fair to EVERYBODY to only teach one. I personally feel that the only rights that are being violated are the christians of this country. If a christian child wants to pray or have a moment of silence at school, and the kid beside of him does not believe in it, why can't that child just respect the right of the christian child to pray. That is not forcing anything on anybody, its just basic common respect that our nation has lost. At my school Thursday morning during the pledge several kids were laughing and talking. When it was over I warned them about respecting others. They said "I don't believe in saying the pledge", and I told them fine then respect the people that do. Why is that so hard for people to understand. It is not violating rights of people for them to just stand silent while somebody does something they believe in. However, it is a violation of a persons rights when they are told that they can't honor their country or their God because it might offend others. Believe in whatever you want to believe in, teach your children whatever you want them to believe, but just don't disrespect others in this process. I think if you would see what is happening to our society because of the lack of respect/morals today that you would be horrified. I have seen more things happen in the 8th grade than I saw when I went to college just a few years ago. Usually the horrible things that happen are with the children that have never been to church. You can argue this point until you are blue in the face if you choose, but I live through it every day. I see things that would make you think twice about raising your children without God in their lives, and I just hope that we can get our schools on the right track. I feel that if public education keeps getting worse that we won't have public education in the near future. I believe at this rate we will only have private schools, and home schooling. I am not beating the bible but something needs to change. If you want to raise your child without religeon that is your choice. However, please have enough sense to raise them with some respect for others that have different beliefs. We live in the land of the free, and I have a hard time understanding why we can't be respectful, and be greatful that we can believe what we choose. I also don't think that teaching creation is a violation of anybodys rights either. Forcing them to believe it would be giving them a punishment if they didn't. I was taught the theory of evolution in school, and my parents taught me about God and creation. It would be unfair to many children to only teach evolution because many children believe in creation. It is just as unfair to teach one as the other, and the only fair way is to teach both.

I can understand your concern about losing morality without faith. But you have to try and understand that its not the schools responsibility to teach morality with religion. If anything they should have a morals and ethics class that teaches basic right from wrong. But to say that the Christian faith is the only way to keep the fabric of morality together is a error. I am not a devout Christian, yet I am a moral and ethicaly sound person. You are a Christian and you see through the eyes of a Christian, therefore when you approach a subject, often times you approach as a Christian and not as a humble human.

For instance you say that it isn't infringing on someones right to have prayer in school. You also say we should teach BOTH views of lifes origins. Think about that. . . If there is organized prayer and I am an atheist, you are subjecting me to your religious views. This is bad for many reasons. First of all, this would mean the state is sponsoring a religion. Second it would mean that if you "opt" out of that prayer, you would be ostracized as being an "outsider". Being a Christian you think that there are two world views. The correct Christian view, and then there is everything else.

You also say that BOTH views should be taught. You do realize that Creation isn't considered a scientific theory right? That means there are not "BOTH" views. It means there is the Scientific theory, then there is the Judeo-Christian view. They are not equal in the eyes of Science. Its a given that Evolution isn't Scientific Law as Frontal mentioned, but it is the best evidence supported theory we have, and this theory is quite supproted as you know. Although being a Christian I'm sure you discount it internally but teach it because you have to. Your Faith demands that Creation is the only answer. There are other Scientific theories and there are other Religious beliefs. So in reality there are many ideas out there about our origns, however the only strongly supported evidence theory we have is Evolution. For now. Evolution may eveolve into a more complex theory. Maybe life began on Earth from a comet impact. Maybe that comet had life on it from another place in the universe that does have the answers as to where exactly life began. Then life eveloved from this basic form into more complex forms of life because of environmental and reproductive variables. Thats what makes Evolution so much more convincing. We accept that we do not have all the answers, but we have enough pieces of the puzzle to create a basic frame and we add more pieces as they come in. So far most of the new pieces support the theory, although there have been a few sligt changes. Like the addittion of a branched human tree instead of a single line. It supports evolution yet slightly changes our path.

quote Originally posted by connecticutFIERO: Why can't people check their religious fundamentalism at the door when they enter public service? Be a person of faith, not a fundamentalist activist that forces FAITH on the public? IS that SO hard to do? I don't make children learn my theory on the universe, I would never even think of it. We have facts, lets use them to our advantage, not discount them because of what we learned in Sunday school.

neither evolution or creation has been proven , both have scientific evidents that supports them but nothing conclusive .
being that! both should be taught as THEORY . to uphold 1 over the other at this point is not only bad policy its also a extreme fundamentist view .

if this were not about religon , we could agree that both theories should be presented with the avalible evidence to support them . this way people can make up their minds with an informed decission , unlike the current situation where we teach evolution as science and dismiss creation as a religon . (wouldn't you agree that even if it is correctly stated in the bible , it wouldn't prove that God exists)

the bible mentions money food and reproduction "shouldn't we remove those topics from our public schools as well"
just because facts may be stated correctly in the bible (or any book for that fact) doesn't mean religon is forced upon us if the schools teach it. the man resposible for anti-biotics was a christain who claimed that a passage of the bible gave him an idea . though anti-biotics were not mentioned in the bible , he somehow made a connection and created a cure that has been reliable for many years. now knowing that this man was a christain and that his discovery was attributed to a passage he read from the bible would it make sence to exclude it from being taught in medical schools in the united states ? should those who dont want religon force upon them see an anti-biotic perscription as an attemp to brain wash them while their are weak and vonerable?

i know my questions seem outragious . but thats how i feel when people say that creationism should not be taught because its a religous fundamental point of view. Lets allow the evidence to be presented . let the people make up their own minds . we've heard all the evidance for evolution and it has yet to answer the question of existance. "after years of looking under the same old rock its time to look under the rest of them"

[This message has been edited by JRM-2M6 (edited 11-13-2004).]

quote Originally posted by connecticutFIERO: So far most of the new pieces support the theory, although there have been a few sligt changes. Like the addittion of a branched human tree instead of a single line. It supports evolution yet slightly changes our path.

You have not forwarded once bit of evidence. We have not found a missing link in the chain of man. With science we should have some kind of idea when we will evolve further if evolution is true. That man, beast, or plants adapt to their environments is not in doubt and has been proven.
Let me go one further. To believe in evolution as fact would suggest we could trace the various stages in the history of evolution. Where can I find them? What scientists have studied evolution? What experiments prove evolution?
I am open minded>

quote Originally posted by JRM-2M6: both have scientific evidents that supports them but nothing conclusive .

Explain please.

quote Originally posted by JRM-2M6: neither evolution or creation has been proven , both have scientific evidents that supports them but nothing conclusive . being that! both should be taught as THEORY . to uphold 1 over the other at this point is not only bad policy its also a extreme fundamentist view . if this were not about religon , we could agree that both theories should be presented with the avalible evidence to support them . this way people can make up their minds with an informed decission , unlike the current situation where we teach evolution as science and dismiss creation as a religon . (wouldn't you agree that even if it is correctly stated in the bible , it wouldn't prove that God exists) the bible mentions money food and reproduction "shouldn't we remove those topics from our public schools as well" just because facts may be stated correctly in the bible (or any book for that fact) doesn't mean religon is forced upon us if the schools teach it. the man resposible for anti-biotics was a christain who claimed that a passage of the bible gave him an idea . though anti-biotics were not mentioned in the bible , he somehow made a connection and created a cure that has been reliable for many years. now knowing that this man was a christain and that his discovery was attributed to a passage he read from the bible who it make sence to exclude it from being taught in medical schools in the united states ? should those who dont want religon force upon them see an anti-biotic perscription as an attemp to brain wash them while their are weak and vonerable? i know my questions seem outragious . but thats how i feel when people say that creationism should not be taught because its a religous fundamental point of view. Lets allow the evidence to be presented . let the people make up their own minds . we've heard all the evidance for evolution and it has yet to answer the question of existance. "after years of looking under the same old rock its time to look under the rest of them"

JRM they are not competing Scientific theories that are both supproted by evidence. That is what they teach you at church to make you feel better. Creation has been around as an explanation of our origins passed down for thousands of years. Evolution came about because of discoveries and the advancement of science. Creationsim is only supported by people looking to prove its true. Evolution was formed as a theory through scientific study. Its not the same thing. If you believe in Creation you will be able to concoct evidence to support your beliefs. Selective evidence biased through personal belief. Evolution was a formed theory that only came about after study and observation. Do you understand the difference. You can believe in creation, but you have to accept it as faith, not as scientific theory. It is unsupported by the scientific community at large, yes there are Christian scientists who do all they can to provide you with debating points, but that is not evidence or a fact supported theory.

On the other point of anti biotics. I don't know where you came up with that story, but I can tell you its not true. Penicillin was discovered by accident. It all happened because of a moldy petrie dish. Here check out the facts.
"In 1928 while organizing a pile of petri dishes in the sink where he had been growing bacteria, Fleming opened each dish and examined it before dropping it into the cleaning mixture. A particular one caught his attention. Mold was growing on one of the dishes, which was supposed to happen, but he discovered that it had contaminated a staphylococcus culture and stopped the bacteria's growth. It fact, it had actually killed it. After taking a sample of the mold, he found that it was from the penicillium family. He named it penicillin and found that it was nontoxic and sufficient in treating many types of bacteria harmful to man.

Fleming contributed his findings to the medical world in 1929, but few seemed interested. He even published a report on the benefits of penicillin in the British Journal of Experimental Pathology. Although Fleming continued working with the mold for some time, a team of chemists and mold specialists eventually took over the work. The research was slowed when several of them died or moved away.

Unfortunately, the interest in penicillin did not peak again until World War II, and Howard Florey and Ernst Chain picked up the research again, found a way to purify it, and presented this powerful antibiotic to the world. Dr. Fleming and his many years of research were not forgotten. He was knighted in 1944 and shared the 1945 Nobel Prize for physiology/medicine with British scientist Ernst Boris Chanin and Sir Howard Walter Florey. In 1947 Dr. Fleming became director of the Wright-Fleming Institute of St. Mary's Hospital.

Dr. Alexander Fleming died on March 11, 1955, at the age of 73, and his remains rest at St. Paul's Cathedral in London. "

http://nh.essortment.com/alexanderflemin_rmkm.htm

quote Originally posted by connecticutFIERO: . . .not open minded . . . because I discount creation as even remotely related to science.

quote Originally posted by JRM-2M6: i know my questions seem outragious . but thats how i feel when people say that creationism should not be taught because its a religous fundamental point of view. Lets allow the evidence to be presented . let the people make up their own minds . we've heard all the evidance for evolution and it has yet to answer the question of existance. "after years of looking under the same old rock its time to look under the rest of them"

Theories take time, they don't just magically give all the answers like creation. They are not competing theories that need to be compared. One is scientific study, the other is religious belief. Why is that so hard to accept? You can believe in spiritual faith, I will believe in the world as we see it with our own eyes, not on incurious faith that provides the answers without thought. This is one of the major problems in this country. There are so many of you who cannot differentiate between religious teachings and factual teachings. If God told you that 1+1=3 thats your prerogitive, if I can show you that the evidence says 1+1=2 and you cannot show that any evidence points to 1+1= 3, then we shouldn't teach in public schools that 1+1=3.

quote Originally posted by JohnnyK: Explain please.

i believe meaning of what i said was clear.

but i will try again ,

evolution has not been proven. it is scientifically accepted but acceptance does not equate proof
it was accepted by many that black were not even human during the slavery days
the earth was thought to be flat many years ago.
people use to believe that a man could not live without a heart. but mechanical hearts have proven that the heart muscle in a pump.

many accepted theories in the scientific community have been labeled as proof . only when it challenged the intellectuals of that day...

i think evolution may have some merit but i doubt it will fully give answers to all of our questions if we don't stop ignoring facts just because the happened to be listed in somebodys religous book

when we talk about the origins of life we are not just refering to mankind . thats true of the bibles account of life and the account held by evolutionist. both asks where did all of this begin and both only quess(hypothisis) where that begining is. neither proves their claims but both state with the desired conclusion and build from there.

evolusionists have turned a blind eye to many things to both prove their theories and avoid reviewing anything that sugguests the bible recorded it before they were born (theres no prize for discovering what has already been discovered)

creationist avoid certain data because it looks too much like evolution both creationist and evolutionists become blind anytime they see evidence of what they BELIEVE is support for an opposing theory.

someday we are gonna have to look at both in order to see everything insted of running away from data just because some book said it first...how do we know for certain that evolution and creation are not related to each other.

you cant evolve from nothing. but if you were created you cant help but evolve from that point on....
both theories are relayed to us in doccumentation and both are handed down to the less informed
both sell it as gospel and those who buy into just 1 of those theories spends their lifetime believing the other is illegitamate just because of where they learned it.

to reject either theory is foolish since neither prove or disprove God
creation would prove we were created but it wouldn't prove who created us. evolution would prove we undergo changes to adapt to our enviroment but it wouldn't prove what started the process or that no devine intervention took place to effect those changes.

quote Originally posted by cliffw: You have not forwarded once bit of evidence. We have not found a missing link in the chain of man. With science we should have some kind of idea when we will evolve further if evolution is true. That man, beast, or plants adapt to their environments is not in doubt and has been proven. Let me go one further. To believe in evolution as fact would suggest we could trace the various stages in the history of evolution. Where can I find them? What scientists have studied evolution? What experiments prove evolution? I am open minded>

IT IS ALL IN THE DNA
very soon we will learn how the DNA records what evolved in to what WHEN
the proof is recorded in the DNA we just can't quite read and understand it yet
but clues are there and the work is on going
very soon the proof will be in

missing links have been found in mans evolution
they were missing in 1850 but 150 years of searching have found them

creationism is a fairytale that has been proven WRONG
dates do not support it

------------------
Question wonder and be wierd
are you kind?

quote Originally posted by connecticutFIERO: I can understand your concern about losing morality without faith. But you have to try and understand that its not the schools responsibility to teach morality with religion. If anything they should have a morals and ethics class that teaches basic right from wrong. But to say that the Christian faith is the only way to keep the fabric of morality together is a error. I am not a devout Christian, yet I am a moral and ethicaly sound person. You are a Christian and you see through the eyes of a Christian, therefore when you approach a subject, often times you approach as a Christian and not as a humble human. For instance you say that it isn't infringing on someones right to have prayer in school. You also say we should teach BOTH views of lifes origins. Think about that. . . If there is organized prayer and I am an atheist, you are subjecting me to your religious views. This is bad for many reasons. First of all, this would mean the state is sponsoring a religion. Second it would mean that if you "opt" out of that prayer, you would be ostracized as being an "outsider". Being a Christian you think that there are two world views. The correct Christian view, and then there is everything else. You also say that BOTH views should be taught. You do realize that Creation isn't considered a scientific theory right? That means there are not "BOTH" views. It means there is the Scientific theory, then there is the Judeo-Christian view. They are not equal in the eyes of Science. Its a given that Evolution isn't Scientific Law as Frontal mentioned, but it is the best evidence supported theory we have, and this theory is quite supproted as you know. Although being a Christian I'm sure you discount it internally but teach it because you have to. Your Faith demands that Creation is the only answer. There are other Scientific theories and there are other Religious beliefs. So in reality there are many ideas out there about our origns, however the only strongly supported evidence theory we have is Evolution. For now. Evolution may eveolve into a more complex theory. Maybe life began on Earth from a comet impact. Maybe that comet had life on it from another place in the universe that does have the answers as to where exactly life began. Then life eveloved from this basic form into more complex forms of life because of environmental and reproductive variables. Thats what makes Evolution so much more convincing. We accept that we do not have all the answers, but we have enough pieces of the puzzle to create a basic frame and we add more pieces as they come in. So far most of the new pieces support the theory, although there have been a few sligt changes. Like the addittion of a branched human tree instead of a single line. It supports evolution yet slightly changes our path.

I definitely understand that Christianity is not a theory, but inelegant design is a theory just as much as evolution is. I am very open minded about this topic, and my Christian views do not cloud my sight. I understand both sides, but I also know that I was very offended when evolution was taught in my high school. I also do not disregard the theory of evolution. It is very possible that God created through a process of evolution. I am a very educated person in the field of Science, and I can say that it has made me question my faith. However, I know that there is a God. I also do not teach evolution because I have to. I teach it because I feel that I should teach both, and let the children decide what they believe. God did not want us to automatically accept him, he wanted us to choose him as our savior, and that is why he made humans. I believe that every person has the right to choose his or her own beliefs. But I also think that we should also have the right to express our beliefs, and be respected while doing so.

quote Originally posted by ray b: creationism is a fairytale that has been proven WRONG dates do not support it

Proven with what evidence? By who?

Which dates don't support it?

links

http://www.nap.edu/html/creationism/

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html

quote Originally posted by JRM-2M6: i believe meaning of what i said was clear.

What I meant was you said that both theories have scientific backing. I am asking what the scientific backing is for creation. Keep in mind that trying to disprove evolution does not prove creation.

I think BOTH should be taught in schools, so the kids can see both sides of the story. Then, they can choose for themselves which they prefer.

quote Originally posted by wvformula88: I definitely understand that Christianity is not a theory, but inelegant design is a theory just as much as evolution is. I am very open minded about this topic, and my Christian views do not cloud my sight. I understand both sides, but I also know that I was very offended when evolution was taught in my high school. [/b]

If you were offended because Evolution was on your high school curriculum, then Christianity has clouded your vision. The idea that evolution shouldn't be taught in schools even though it is the best answers we have been able to come up with shows that you are indeed biased in your view of evolution. I understand that you are well educated, but my thoughts tell me that you probably never really grasped evolution because like you say it offended you. Evolution is contrary to creation, therefore you could not accept it because it would question your faith.

Intellient Design is not a scientific theory, its a hodgepodge secular sounding version of the bible's creation. There is no science behind it. It may be a theory, but its not a scientifically studied theory and should not be taught as an alternate version of our origins. Please remember we have to separate our faith from public schools, not just because it might offend somone, but because it leads down a predefined path that has never been proven. Evoultion is merely the best scientific theory we have, let it be that. If you need to believe in creation because of your faith then do so. But we must not impede our learning and discovery because of a predefined course of path and future. Do you believe in the end times? Ever hear of a self fullfilling prophecy?

quote I also do not disregard the theory of evolution. It is very possible that God created through a process of evolution.

I agree completely. That is possible. However, literally believing the Earth is only 6000-8000 years old? That is not. All the animals in pairs on a boat while the whole world flooded?

My take on the bible is not literal. Thats leaves room for sorting out truth from myth.

quote [b]I am a very educated person in the field of Science, and I can say that it has made me question my faith. However, I know that there is a God. I also do not teach evolution because I have to. I teach it because I feel that I should teach both, and let the children decide what they believe. God did not want us to automatically accept him, he wanted us to choose him as our savior, and that is why he made humans. I believe that every person has the right to choose his or her own beliefs. But I also think that we should also have the right to express our beliefs, and be respected while doing so.

Again I have to say that teaching Christian belief is not the same as teaching two competing scientific theories. Its not the same thing. If it were I would agree with you. One is scientific theory studied with a critical view. The other is a self fullfilling circle of faith that requires no proof and cannot be defined as a scientific theory. You can break from the literal sense of creation and study the possibilities of forming a theory based on evidence that supports it, but that won't happen because of the nature of faith and belief. You cannot question the literal word of God and accept only what you want, thats the policy as far as I know. Never once have I heard a true believer say its ok to pick and choose from the bible. It would break the circle of belief and fall apart at the seams. Its too rigid for logical scientific study, which is why its easy to believe for someone who wants to believe.