BF2S Forums Science in Texas doomed.

Skruples wrote:

Come on creationists. Bring your A game, and let's see why you think creationism is a valid scientific theory.

Project Steve wrote:

The list of Steves is far more prestigious than any list of living scientists the creationists have ever produced. It includes Nobel Prize winners, members of the National Academy of Sciences, and influential authors such as Stephen Hawking. It is telling that creationist lists tend to be lean on practicing research biologists. In contrast, about two-thirds of the scientists on NCSE's list are biologists, who are the most qualified to evaluate whether the evidence favors evolution. Another point is that the NCSE's list includes the information on where the Steves got their degrees and their current position. By not doing so, the creationist lists do not make it obvious how many of the people listed are not practicing scientists.

Bertster7 wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Well, I think this thread demonstrates exactly why education should be privatized in America.

A more rational nation would not even have this debate between evolution and creationism, because evolution has a much more realistic basis than creationism.

Given the fundamentalism that exists in our dysfunctional society, I'd prefer that we privatize the market so that the religious nuts can have their own schools while the rest of us can actually learn science.

That's a bad idea. Why should the children of religious nutters not have access to education about evolution. Even if they are prejudiced by stupid religious parents who don't believe in evolution, they should still be exposed to it and not have anyone legitimising this creationist nonsense.

I think it's a disgrace that a highly developed country like the US should even be contemplating seriously teaching creationism to anyone. It's almost on a par with the medieval educational practices under the Taliban. Allowing religion to directly influence the teaching of science is absurd.

theDunadan wrote:

How can you explain matter from nothing? (notice: rhetorical) We can hardly comprehend absolute nothingness. Think about it: nothing. Not even darkness. No space; nothing. Infinitely. Then what? Boom! There's matter out of absolute nothing. I dunno. Either way you look at it, it's amazing. Miraculous! I, for one, believe in science and evolution (read on); I believe that things can evolve and adapt. *BUT* I believe in a creator; one who created everything: science, evolution, matter, everything. Yes, I believe in God. Though, don't get me wrong. I don't claim to understand it all; that would be rather foolish. I must say, though, that "religion" often gives the wrong idea. Some "religious" people I've known have been the worst people I've ever known. And many atrocities have been committed in the name of "religion." I understand that. I understand how very tainted it is: both peoples' views of "religion" and "religion" in itself, but, regardless of "religion", I believe in God and can see no reason not to. I see no reason why it should be harder to believe that God exists than to believe that matter came from absolute nothingness.

mikkel wrote:

theDunadan wrote:

How can you explain matter from nothing? (notice: rhetorical) We can hardly comprehend absolute nothingness. Think about it: nothing. Not even darkness. No space; nothing. Infinitely. Then what? Boom! There's matter out of absolute nothing. I dunno. Either way you look at it, it's amazing. Miraculous! I, for one, believe in science and evolution (read on); I believe that things can evolve and adapt. *BUT* I believe in a creator; one who created everything: science, evolution, matter, everything. Yes, I believe in God. Though, don't get me wrong. I don't claim to understand it all; that would be rather foolish. I must say, though, that "religion" often gives the wrong idea. Some "religious" people I've known have been the worst people I've ever known. And many atrocities have been committed in the name of "religion." I understand that. I understand how very tainted it is: both peoples' views of "religion" and "religion" in itself, but, regardless of "religion", I believe in God and can see no reason not to. I see no reason why it should be harder to believe that God exists than to believe that matter came from absolute nothingness.

I don't understand scientifically-minded people who look to religion to explain the beginnings of the universe, when it poses exactly the same questions. What was before God? According to religion, God was a catalyst, but according to science, so was the Big Bang. There must have existed -something- before either. Even if you don't believe that something existed before God, then is it not just as likely that nothing existed before the Big Bang?

You're stuck precisely where you were before, only instead of following through with your convictions, you've capped off a world view defined by science with a creationist view defined by religion, with the only change being that you now have an ambivalent and fundamentally incompatible collection of beliefs.

If you look to religion from science, or to science from religion, to answer the question of what was before the most distant times you can comprehend, you aren't going to get any definite answers. Neither know.

Turquoise wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

To put this in perspective, most research shows that roughly half of Americans believe in creationism.  Scary shit, eh?  We're about on the same level of Turkey in this respect.  Islamic societies are some of the few that are more adamant about creationism than we are.

Are you serious?

Is America that backwards?

When it comes to religion.... YES.

I live in one of the most religious states in the country, so you can imagine how awkward I feel....

I'm not sure why America is as fundamentalist as it is, but it does give you an idea of why our social policies are often rather...  Third World, shall we say?...

On a more personal note, I work with a number of people who are creationist.  Don't get me wrong; they're still nice people who seem intelligent in most other respects, but I just don't get their religious views.

It's like they've been brainwashed by tradition, but I guess that's true of most of humanity.  Tradition really is the mother of oppression...  and ignorance.

mikkel wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

mikkel wrote:

I don't understand scientifically-minded people who look to religion to explain the beginnings of the universe, when it poses exactly the same questions. What was before God? According to religion, God was a catalyst, but according to science, so was the Big Bang. There must have existed -something- before either. Even if you don't believe that something existed before God, then is it not just as likely that nothing existed before the Big Bang?

You're stuck precisely where you were before, only instead of following through with your convictions, you've capped off a world view defined by science with a creationist view defined by religion, with the only change being that you now have an ambivalent and fundamentally incompatible collection of beliefs.

If you look to religion from science, or to science from religion, to answer the question of what was before the most distant times you can comprehend, you aren't going to get any definite answers. Neither know.

But you're looking at the issue logically.

Religion isn't bound by logic, which is how it can make such ludicrous assertions. It is also why it has no place in the classroom outside of the area of theological study, which is in no way compatible with science or any other subjects rooted in logic.

I'm not looking at the issue logically. I'm specifically commenting on people looking to religion to explain what was "before". Not even religion explains that, so it's a silly justification to take the easy way out.

SenorToenails wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

Wow.

Scary.

In defense of my country, 50% of people may believe in "creationism", but not necessarily the concept of young earth creationism.  That is a tiny minority of truly backwards people.  Most of creationism believers are the intelligent design folk or the other forms of creationism, which are a lot less dangerous.  Still, it shouldn't be taught in public schools.  Besides, 50% of the country is not fighting to have creationism taught in public school.  Its much like how a large percentage of the country believes in angels or miracles -- it doesn't automatically make them irrational.

I don't care if people believe that god created the world.  Its a lot easier to understand than the scientific reason and it offers comfort.  Do people really want to live through life thinking there is no higher purpose?  Many times people have religion as a way to give life a purpose, and to ease the idea that after death, there is nothing.  Creationism is a belief that goes along with that.  People don't want to think that they were the product of evolution from a primordial ooze.  They would much rather think that some supreme being made humans in his image.  That is not a justification but an explanation.

People who want creationism taught in public schools are NOT the silent majority, but a very noisy minority -- in most places.

Turquoise wrote:

SenorToenails wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

Wow.

Scary.

In defense of my country, 50% of people may believe in "creationism", but not necessarily the concept of young earth creationism.  That is a tiny minority of truly backwards people.  Most of creationism believers are the intelligent design folk or the other forms of creationism, which are a lot less dangerous.  Still, it shouldn't be taught in public schools.  Besides, 50% of the country is not fighting to have creationism taught in public school.  Its much like how a large percentage of the country believes in angels or miracles -- it doesn't automatically make them irrational.

I don't care if people believe that god created the world.  Its a lot easier to understand than the scientific reason and it offers comfort.  Do people really want to live through life thinking there is no higher purpose?  Many times people have religion as a way to give life a purpose, and to ease the idea that after death, there is nothing.  Creationism is a belief that goes along with that.  People don't want to think that they were the product of evolution from a primordial ooze.  They would much rather think that some supreme being made humans in his image.  That is not a justification but an explanation.

People who want creationism taught in public schools are NOT the silent majority, but a very noisy minority -- in most places.

Good points...  There are different forms of creationism that I should've explained better.

Unfortunately, I actually do know some "young Earth" types.

Whatever the case, I just hope this noisy minority doesn't destroy our education system further, and again, I'm starting to feel like privatization is the better option.

In response to what Bertster said earlier, by American principles, children are essentially the property of their parents.  Therefore, they are free to send their kids to schools that only teach creationism (a few actually exist).  It is sad that this means some kids would miss out on important information by privatizing things, but I'd prefer that over making all children have to suffer under the constant annoyances of the religious.

Bertster7 wrote:

Don't you have a national curriculum? One that requires all accredited schools to teach evolution? That's how the issue is dealt with here. Even specially set up religious schools, like the Emmanuel Schools Foundation are required to teach evolution, no matter what the parents think of it, or what the teachers in the school think of it.

SenorToenails wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Good points...  There are different forms of creationism that I should've explained better.

Unfortunately, I actually do know some "young Earth" types.

Whatever the case, I just hope this noisy minority doesn't destroy our education system further, and again, I'm starting to feel like privatization is the better option.

In response to what Bertster said earlier, by American principles, children are essentially the property of their parents.  Therefore, they are free to send their kids to schools that only teach creationism (a few actually exist).  It is sad that this means some kids would miss out on important information by privatizing things, but I'd prefer that over making all children have to suffer under the constant annoyances of the religious.

Heh.  I knew a few of those myself.  Fossil evidence is a trick perpetrated by the devil.  Duh!

Still, I doubt privatization is an optimal solution.  One of the reasons is that some people will never be able to afford private education, and therefore the government mandate that kids remain in school until 16 (I think its 16, but it may vary depending on state) would be ridiculous.  No matter how cheap something is, someone will either refuse to pay or not have the cash.  Then, who decides the curriculum for those private schools?  You can't please everyone.