Jump to content

IPBoard Styles©Fisana

Photo

Separation Of Church & State

Started by Flint , Sep 14 2004 03:59 PM

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
149 replies to this topic

#61 Flint

Flint

    Slacker

  • Members
  • 2,878 posts
  • Location:Bohemia
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 September 2004 - 01:58 PM

They're teaching the theories of past scientists to help give students ideas of how we have so many different species.

You of all people should know that a large chunk of what we learn in science are theories, which have yet to be proven true.

You may think evolution is a lie, but others might think its fact.

#62 Alakhriveion

Alakhriveion

    Anyone who tells you chemistry is an exact science is overthinki

  • Members
  • 4,718 posts
  • Location:Connecticut

Posted 18 September 2004 - 01:59 PM

I'd agree with that. I think a policy of evolution in public schools would be a good one. Otherwise, as I said, the Bible may have editing forced upon it.

#63 arunma

arunma

    Physics and math maniac

  • Members
  • 3,615 posts
  • Location:University of Minnesota
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 September 2004 - 02:30 PM

Originally posted by Flint@Sep 18 2004, 01:58 PM
They're teaching the theories of past scientists to help give students ideas of how we have so many different species.

You of all people should know that a large chunk of what we learn in science are theories, which have yet to be proven true.

You may think evolution is a lie, but others might think its fact.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So what do you think the government's official position is on this topic?

#64 Flint

Flint

    Slacker

  • Members
  • 2,878 posts
  • Location:Bohemia
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 September 2004 - 02:36 PM

Evolution? Or the teaching of it?I don't think the government as a whole has any sort of position on evolution itself. Whether or not you believe in evolution is just a matter of individual beliefs.

But public schools are allowed to teach the theories of evolution because its not a religion. Its science.

Now, there's absolutely nothing wrong with social studies classes teaching about religions, because religion has always played a large part in history and different cultures. But the problem comes in when schools start trying to do the job of the church.

#65 SteveT

SteveT

    100% a Dick

  • Members
  • 5,060 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 September 2004 - 02:44 PM

The only problem I have with the teachign of evolution is that they teach it as truth, not as the best hypothesis we have.

#66 arunma

arunma

    Physics and math maniac

  • Members
  • 3,615 posts
  • Location:University of Minnesota
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 September 2004 - 02:45 PM

Your statement assumes that evolution is innocuous. But it directly contradicts church teachings. Do you see the problem if kids learn one thing in Sunday school and another thing in Monday through Friday school?

You can't just say "do your thing in church, and we'll do our thing in school," if the school tells kids that what they learned in church is all a lie.

#67 Flint

Flint

    Slacker

  • Members
  • 2,878 posts
  • Location:Bohemia
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 September 2004 - 02:49 PM

But school's aren't teaching evolution as truth! At least mine didn't.

#68 SteveT

SteveT

    100% a Dick

  • Members
  • 5,060 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 September 2004 - 02:50 PM

Mine sure did. Actually, the biology teachers were required, in the spirit of religious equality, to mention that not everyone believed in evolution, and present the alternate beliefs. My teacher brought that up in a tone that made it very obvious that she resented having to do so.

#69 arunma

arunma

    Physics and math maniac

  • Members
  • 3,615 posts
  • Location:University of Minnesota
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 September 2004 - 02:52 PM

My high school didn''t even discuss alternatives to evolution (nor does my university). So evolution was simply stated as fact.

Kudos to Kansas, which banned evolution!

#70 SteveT

SteveT

    100% a Dick

  • Members
  • 5,060 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 September 2004 - 02:53 PM

Well, universities are generally allowed to teach whatever they want, unless they're state schools.

#71 arunma

arunma

    Physics and math maniac

  • Members
  • 3,615 posts
  • Location:University of Minnesota
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 September 2004 - 02:54 PM

I go to the University of Minnesota. That's about as state-run as they come.

#72 SteveT

SteveT

    100% a Dick

  • Members
  • 5,060 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 September 2004 - 02:57 PM

Yes, I suppose it is.

#73 Flint

Flint

    Slacker

  • Members
  • 2,878 posts
  • Location:Bohemia
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 September 2004 - 03:03 PM

My teacher said herself that she didn't believe in evolution, but she recognized the need to teach it. She didn't mind doing it at all. Evolution is science.

#74 arunma

arunma

    Physics and math maniac

  • Members
  • 3,615 posts
  • Location:University of Minnesota
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 September 2004 - 03:04 PM

Then you go to a really weird school (weird in a good way). Our schools don't teach creationism.

#75 Flint

Flint

    Slacker

  • Members
  • 2,878 posts
  • Location:Bohemia
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 September 2004 - 03:04 PM

o.o um.. neither does mine.

#76 SteveT

SteveT

    100% a Dick

  • Members
  • 5,060 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 September 2004 - 03:14 PM

Evolution is a science, but at this point a young and crude one. Bear in mind that for a theory, you must have a phenomena that is:

a. Observable
b. Reproduceable
c. Demonstrated to be predictable in light of that theory

The other sciences: Physics, chemistry, the rest of biology, earth science, meteorology, microevolution, etc all fit those criteria. (Well, meteorology has issues with c, but mostly because of the insane number of variables involved). Macroevolution horribly fails all of these, and is therefore not a true scientific theory. It's more of an educated guess about history than it is a science.

(Incidentally, I had my definitions confused earlier when I referenced microevolution. I meant to say macro, apparently.)

#77 arunma

arunma

    Physics and math maniac

  • Members
  • 3,615 posts
  • Location:University of Minnesota
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 September 2004 - 03:15 PM

Originally posted by Flint@Sep 18 2004, 03:04 PM
o.o um.. neither does mine.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So the schools do teach evolution as a fact, as Steve and I said.

#78 Flint

Flint

    Slacker

  • Members
  • 2,878 posts
  • Location:Bohemia
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 September 2004 - 03:26 PM

What the... just because the school doesn't teach creationism (which it shouldn't) doesn't mean it teaches evolution as a fact.

#79 arunma

arunma

    Physics and math maniac

  • Members
  • 3,615 posts
  • Location:University of Minnesota
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 September 2004 - 03:32 PM

Originally posted by Flint@Sep 18 2004, 03:26 PM
What the... just because the school doesn't teach creationism (which it shouldn't) doesn't mean it teaches evolution as a fact.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So it's teaching evolution as a lie?

You might say that it's teaching evolution as a possibility. But if only one possibility is presented, then according to Sherlock Holmes, it must be correct.

Therefore, either schools are teaching evolution as a fact, or they are deliberately teaching lies. Which is it?

#80 Alakhriveion

Alakhriveion

    Anyone who tells you chemistry is an exact science is overthinki

  • Members
  • 4,718 posts
  • Location:Connecticut

Posted 18 September 2004 - 03:41 PM

If you're teaching students science, you teach evolution. If you're teaching them religion, you teach them creation. Schools do not teach religoin, generally, and they do teach science.

So it's teaching evolution as a lie?

It can be objective, you know? Now, it won't say "Remember, kids, the things you learn in this class aren't facts!" Because kids are dumb, and easily become confused. The thing is, nothing is a fact, all we have is the best running theory. For the origin of species, that's currently evolution, so they'll teach that without regard for others, just as they don't teach alternatives to gravity.

Macroevolution horribly fails all of these, and is therefore not a true scientific theory. It's more of an educated guess about history than it is a science.

Show this.

#81 arunma

arunma

    Physics and math maniac

  • Members
  • 3,615 posts
  • Location:University of Minnesota
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 September 2004 - 03:56 PM

OK Alak, your comments make more sense (which is sort of weird, since you're stoned. :P), so I can agree with that. As to the contention that evolution has more evidence than creation...well, that's debatable. But that' a different debate. So ya, that's cool.

#82 SteveT

SteveT

    100% a Dick

  • Members
  • 5,060 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 September 2004 - 03:56 PM

Arright, Alak, tell me how you can watch Macroevolution take place and do it again with the same results? Then show me a plan about how to conduct an evolution experiment in a lab and predict what complex species will come from what bacteria under certain conditions.

#83 Alakhriveion

Alakhriveion

    Anyone who tells you chemistry is an exact science is overthinki

  • Members
  • 4,718 posts
  • Location:Connecticut

Posted 18 September 2004 - 04:02 PM

You've got it wrong. The theory isn't just one thing, it's thus:

Evolution, as we can observe, happens.

The Theory you refer too says that the same actions, with much larger effects, will be evident in the fossil record.

They are.

Assumption: The fossil record indicates the development of animal life in the way it would be expected to considering it's properties.

With that last one, the theory you suggest we suggest holds true, not as one theory, but as an idea based upon several. With, of course, that last assumption, that the world has always worked roughly as it does not. That's an assumption I'm willing to make.

#84 Oberon Storm

Oberon Storm

    And so it begins.

  • Members
  • 3,212 posts
  • Location:San Marcos, TX
  • Gender:Male
  • United States

Posted 18 September 2004 - 04:11 PM

Originally posted by arunma@Sep 17 2004, 11:31 PM
OK.

But like you said; some people are forgetting that.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I meant that some people in this thread have forgetten. No one in congrees is trying to legislate what you believe in.

As for the evolution thing, my high school just avoided the whole issue altogether. It isn't that important anyway. You don't need to touch human evolution to teach about evolution.

#85 arunma

arunma

    Physics and math maniac

  • Members
  • 3,615 posts
  • Location:University of Minnesota
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 September 2004 - 04:38 PM

Originally posted by Chief Fire Storm@Sep 18 2004, 04:11 PM
I meant that some people in this thread have forgetten. No one in congrees is trying to legislate what you believe in.

As for the evolution thing, my high school just avoided the whole issue altogether. It isn't that important anyway. You don't need to touch human evolution to teach about evolution.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actually, my university biology course (but not the textbook) avoided human evolution too, which is fairly respectable. Like you said, it's a pretty useless topic.

Unfortunately, my high school shoved it down our throats. So that sucks. But I wasn't a Christian back then, so I didn't really give a flying freak.

#86 Alakhriveion

Alakhriveion

    Anyone who tells you chemistry is an exact science is overthinki

  • Members
  • 4,718 posts
  • Location:Connecticut

Posted 18 September 2004 - 04:43 PM

Actually, my university biology course (but not the textbook) avoided human evolution too, which is fairly respectable. Like you said, it's a pretty useless topic.

No, it's not. Well, it is, unless you're curious about that kind of thing.

Unfortunately, my high school shoved it down our throats.

That's pretty much their job.

#87 Oberon Storm

Oberon Storm

    And so it begins.

  • Members
  • 3,212 posts
  • Location:San Marcos, TX
  • Gender:Male
  • United States

Posted 18 September 2004 - 04:46 PM

They'll shove anything down our throat. I got yelled at for dinking Mt. Dew when our school was a Coke school.

#88 arunma

arunma

    Physics and math maniac

  • Members
  • 3,615 posts
  • Location:University of Minnesota
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 September 2004 - 04:48 PM

My university is a Coke campus too. Every freakin' vending machine and soda fountain has Coke products. So do the vending machines in my apartment, because I live in a university apartment. But I've got a 24 pack of Pepsi in my fridge. Heh, the fools will never know.

#89 SteveT

SteveT

    100% a Dick

  • Members
  • 5,060 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 September 2004 - 06:06 PM

[quote]Originally posted by alak+-->
QUOTE(alak)
Evolution, as we can observe, happens.[/b][/quote]

Yes, that is microevolution. As I already mentioned, that part does count as an actual theory. We can watch it, we can predict it.

#90 Alakhriveion

Alakhriveion

    Anyone who tells you chemistry is an exact science is overthinki

  • Members
  • 4,718 posts
  • Location:Connecticut

Posted 18 September 2004 - 06:34 PM

1. The fossil record is an indirect observation.

2. There is still no basis to prove its reproduceability.

1. Refer to the assumption in the post.
2. There's evidence that, under the assumption, fossils are dead animal's bones.
Back to Controversial


  1. Zelda Legends Forums
  2. →
  3. → Controversial
  4. Privacy Policy
  5. The Rules ·
Copyright © 2025 Zelda Legends