We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 3
Teaching of Intelligent Design
Topic Started: Dec 21 2005, 09:34 AM (869 Views)
Benjamin
Member Avatar

[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Vulcan
Dec 21 2005, 07:41 PM
Myrdaal
Dec 21 2005, 07:39 PM
Traek
Dec 21 2005, 01:58 PM
Myrdaal
Dec 21 2005, 03:00 PM
zorg222
Dec 21 2005, 12:08 PM
Why can't we simply present both theories to the students? After all, neither is solid fact, so why teach one over the other?

Because, one is based on religuous views which not everyone embraces. The other is based on research and experimentation unbiased by religion. Therefore the latter is more acceptable generally.

Oh and the teaching may start as "views" but it will eventually turn into being taught as fact. Shroud brought the point up, despite the fact that much of what we are taught in science is theory it is taught to us as fact.

What if I don't embrace all of the evolution theory. It's only a theory. No one has proved that the Big Bang occured, but we're expected to believe that it did.

No one proved that God created the Universe, and no one is being forced to believe that He did.

Evolution and Intellegent Design should be separate optional courses, but not mentioned in a science class.

Besides, the opposite of Intellegent Design isn't evolution. It's the Big Bang. I do believe that evolution occurs, but I do not believe that the Big Bang occured.

I'm talking about the theory of evolution not the Big Bang. They're separate things. The Big Bang and intelligent design cannot coincide, however intelligent design and evolution can.

Anyways evolution belongs in science class because it is based on scientific research. Intelligent design is not and thus does not belong in science class. If it was made an optional course that'd be great, but it's not science, it's faith.

But they can't teach it for separation of church and state.

Who said school was state? It's not illegal to teach religion in a public school. People just think it is.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Curry
Member Avatar

[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Traek
Dec 22 2005, 09:17 AM
Vulcan
Dec 21 2005, 07:41 PM
Myrdaal
Dec 21 2005, 07:39 PM
Traek
Dec 21 2005, 01:58 PM
Myrdaal
Dec 21 2005, 03:00 PM
zorg222
Dec 21 2005, 12:08 PM
Why can't we simply present both theories to the students? After all, neither is solid fact, so why teach one over the other?

Because, one is based on religuous views which not everyone embraces. The other is based on research and experimentation unbiased by religion. Therefore the latter is more acceptable generally.

Oh and the teaching may start as "views" but it will eventually turn into being taught as fact. Shroud brought the point up, despite the fact that much of what we are taught in science is theory it is taught to us as fact.

What if I don't embrace all of the evolution theory. It's only a theory. No one has proved that the Big Bang occured, but we're expected to believe that it did.

No one proved that God created the Universe, and no one is being forced to believe that He did.

Evolution and Intellegent Design should be separate optional courses, but not mentioned in a science class.

Besides, the opposite of Intellegent Design isn't evolution. It's the Big Bang. I do believe that evolution occurs, but I do not believe that the Big Bang occured.

I'm talking about the theory of evolution not the Big Bang. They're separate things. The Big Bang and intelligent design cannot coincide, however intelligent design and evolution can.

Anyways evolution belongs in science class because it is based on scientific research. Intelligent design is not and thus does not belong in science class. If it was made an optional course that'd be great, but it's not science, it's faith.

But they can't teach it for separation of church and state.

Who said school was state? It's not illegal to teach religion in a public school. People just think it is.

Well, they are trying to take out the "under God" phrase in the Pledge of Allegiance (sp?). Also, if they allowe the teaching of religion in public school, it's only a matter of hours before someone'll try to challenge it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Shroud
Member Avatar
Know Your Enemy
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Americans need to lay off on their policies. England never have such problems.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Spence
Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
I think everyone is missing the point though. Let me put it this way:

Big Bang creating everything: Theory
God creating everything: Theory

Both have never been proven as the exact way things came to be, so why can't both theories be taught in schools, as both are just as valid.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Benjamin
Member Avatar

[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Vulcan
Dec 22 2005, 09:47 AM
Traek
Dec 22 2005, 09:17 AM
Vulcan
Dec 21 2005, 07:41 PM
Myrdaal
Dec 21 2005, 07:39 PM
Traek
Dec 21 2005, 01:58 PM
Myrdaal
Dec 21 2005, 03:00 PM
zorg222
Dec 21 2005, 12:08 PM
Why can't we simply present both theories to the students? After all, neither is solid fact, so why teach one over the other?

Because, one is based on religuous views which not everyone embraces. The other is based on research and experimentation unbiased by religion. Therefore the latter is more acceptable generally.

Oh and the teaching may start as "views" but it will eventually turn into being taught as fact. Shroud brought the point up, despite the fact that much of what we are taught in science is theory it is taught to us as fact.

What if I don't embrace all of the evolution theory. It's only a theory. No one has proved that the Big Bang occured, but we're expected to believe that it did.

No one proved that God created the Universe, and no one is being forced to believe that He did.

Evolution and Intellegent Design should be separate optional courses, but not mentioned in a science class.

Besides, the opposite of Intellegent Design isn't evolution. It's the Big Bang. I do believe that evolution occurs, but I do not believe that the Big Bang occured.

I'm talking about the theory of evolution not the Big Bang. They're separate things. The Big Bang and intelligent design cannot coincide, however intelligent design and evolution can.

Anyways evolution belongs in science class because it is based on scientific research. Intelligent design is not and thus does not belong in science class. If it was made an optional course that'd be great, but it's not science, it's faith.

But they can't teach it for separation of church and state.

Who said school was state? It's not illegal to teach religion in a public school. People just think it is.

Well, they are trying to take out the "under God" phrase in the Pledge of Allegiance (sp?). Also, if they allowe the teaching of religion in public school, it's only a matter of hours before someone'll try to challenge it.

The Pledge of Alliegance isn't just a school thing, though.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
RagingFuryBlack
Member Avatar
Member
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Traek
Dec 22 2005, 10:17 AM
Vulcan
Dec 21 2005, 07:41 PM
Myrdaal
Dec 21 2005, 07:39 PM
Traek
Dec 21 2005, 01:58 PM
Myrdaal
Dec 21 2005, 03:00 PM
zorg222
Dec 21 2005, 12:08 PM
Why can't we simply present both theories to the students? After all, neither is solid fact, so why teach one over the other?

Because, one is based on religuous views which not everyone embraces. The other is based on research and experimentation unbiased by religion. Therefore the latter is more acceptable generally.

Oh and the teaching may start as "views" but it will eventually turn into being taught as fact. Shroud brought the point up, despite the fact that much of what we are taught in science is theory it is taught to us as fact.

What if I don't embrace all of the evolution theory. It's only a theory. No one has proved that the Big Bang occured, but we're expected to believe that it did.

No one proved that God created the Universe, and no one is being forced to believe that He did.

Evolution and Intellegent Design should be separate optional courses, but not mentioned in a science class.

Besides, the opposite of Intellegent Design isn't evolution. It's the Big Bang. I do believe that evolution occurs, but I do not believe that the Big Bang occured.

I'm talking about the theory of evolution not the Big Bang. They're separate things. The Big Bang and intelligent design cannot coincide, however intelligent design and evolution can.

Anyways evolution belongs in science class because it is based on scientific research. Intelligent design is not and thus does not belong in science class. If it was made an optional course that'd be great, but it's not science, it's faith.

But they can't teach it for separation of church and state.

Who said school was state? It's not illegal to teach religion in a public school. People just think it is.

Actuially, if they teach it from a non-historical standpoint, its against the law for them to recieve any type of federal or state funding.


Simply put, intelligent design is anything but intelligent. Not a theory, should not be taught.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Spence
Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
Simply put, intelligent design is anything but intelligent. Not a theory, should not be taught.


Here I go again with the dictionary definitions..

Theory: A belief or principle that guides action or assists comprehension or judgment.

By definition, intelligent design is a theory.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Glitch
Blasphemer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Vulcan
Dec 22 2005, 09:47 AM
Well, they are trying to take out the "under God" phrase in the Pledge of Allegiance (sp?). Also, if they allowe the teaching of religion in public school, it's only a matter of hours before someone'll try to challenge it.

Who is "they"? Yes, some individuals in California did sue to have "under God" removed, but they didn't win the lawsuit. No one forces you to say the Pledge of Allegiance anyway.

I'm not saying they should teach religion in public schools. I think they should teach students about religion, particularly in a historical context, but not preach to them or try to convert them or anything.

Quote:
 
Here I go again with the dictionary definitions..

Theory: A belief or principle that guides action or assists comprehension or judgment.

By definition, intelligent design is a theory.

Here you go again removing the other 5 dictionary definitions that don't suit your little cause. By actual definition of Dictionary.com, your apparent source, a theory is:
Quote:
 
1.  A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.
2. The branch of a science or art consisting of its explanatory statements, accepted principles, and methods of analysis, as opposed to practice: a fine musician who had never studied theory.
3. A set of theorems that constitute a systematic view of a branch of mathematics.
4. Abstract reasoning; speculation: a decision based on experience rather than theory.
5. A belief or principle that guides action or assists comprehension or judgment: staked out the house on the theory that criminals usually return to the scene of the crime.
6. An assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a conjecture.

That's just what the word theory means.
A scientific theory, as stated in Wikipedia, is quite different:
Quote:
 
In scientific usage, a theory does not mean an unsubstantiated guess or hunch, as it does in other contexts. Neither is a scientific theory a fact. Scientific theories are never proven to be true, but can be disproven. All scientific understanding takes the form of hypotheses, theories, or laws.
Theories are typically ways of explaining why things happen, often, but not always after the fact that they happen is no longer in scientific dispute. In referring to the "theory of global warming" for example, the worldwide temperatures have been measured and seem to be increasing. The "theory of global warming" refers instead to scientific work that attempts to explain how and why this could be happening.


It's not a scientific theory, and therefore does not belong in a science class. Plain and simple.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Clapton
Member Avatar
Also known as Feare, Aoine, Slowhand
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I hope you all know, the original title for the "Intelligent Design" book was Creationism. Also, it is just another stupid attempt to get religion into our schools. Science is fact, religion is not. And shouldn't even be taught in the schools, hopefully it will be expelled from the country one day.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sw33t_DreamZ
Member Avatar
Busy Momma
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
evotution is a theory, from what I gather intelligent design is another theory. funny when I went through school I dont even remember that they taught evolution at all in school. why must children be force fed something like evolution. I say let them find for themselves and choose for themselves what to believe. Schools should provide literature on all "theory's" but not preach any single one.

Also about the seperation of church and state that is a line that has been blown out of proportion in my mind. What did our founding fathers come here to America for? Freedom of religion they wanted to practice what they believed. I think if our forefathers saw alot of what is happening in America today they would roll over in their graves!!!

also personally I find it easier to believe that some "higher being" was behind the big bang happening then that it just happened to happen. :yes:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Glitch
Blasphemer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
evotution is a theory, from what I gather intelligent design is another theory.  funny when I went through school I dont even remember that they taught evolution at all in school.  why must children be force fed something like evolution. I say let them find for themselves and choose for themselves what to believe.  Schools should provide literature on all "theory's" but not preach any single one.

No offense, but did you not read anything I posted in this topic? Intelligent design is not a scientific theory. It is an idea. Evolution, meanwhile, is one of the best-supported theories in science. There's more proof for evolution than there is for general relativity (E=MC^2).
If you don't want your children to be taught the latest and best information we have about the world, then don't send them to public school. Simple as that.

Quote:
 
Also about the seperation of church and state that is a line that has been blown out of proportion in my mind.  What did our founding fathers come here to America for?  Freedom of religion they wanted to practice what they believed.  I think if our forefathers saw alot of what is happening in America today they would roll over in their graves!!!

Yes, if they saw what's happening today, such as all this religious fanaticism, they would be rolling over in their graves. You think they wrote the First Amendment for no reason?
By the way, Thomas Jefferson wasn't a Christian, he was a Deist.

Quote:
 
also personally I find it easier to believe that some "higher being" was behind the big bang happening then that it just happened to happen.  :yes:

Apparently the majority of the world's scientists beg to differ.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Spence
Member
[ *  *  *  * ]


Quote:
 
Science is fact, religion is not.


Science may be fact, but the notion that the big bang theory created the universe is not fact.

Glitch
 
Here you go again removing the other 5 dictionary definitions that don't suit your little cause. By actual definition of Dictionary.com, your apparent source, a theory is:

Quote:
 
1.  A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.
2. The branch of a science or art consisting of its explanatory statements, accepted principles, and methods of analysis, as opposed to practice: a fine musician who had never studied theory.
3. A set of theorems that constitute a systematic view of a branch of mathematics.
4. Abstract reasoning; speculation: a decision based on experience rather than theory.
5. A belief or principle that guides action or assists comprehension or judgment: staked out the house on the theory that criminals usually return to the scene of the crime.
6. An assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a conjecture.


That's just what the word theory means.
A scientific theory, as stated in Wikipedia, is quite different:

Quote:
 
In scientific usage, a theory does not mean an unsubstantiated guess or hunch, as it does in other contexts. Neither is a scientific theory a fact. Scientific theories are never proven to be true, but can be disproven. All scientific understanding takes the form of hypotheses, theories, or laws.
Theories are typically ways of explaining why things happen, often, but not always after the fact that they happen is no longer in scientific dispute. In referring to the "theory of global warming" for example, the worldwide temperatures have been measured and seem to be increasing. The "theory of global warming" refers instead to scientific work that attempts to explain how and why this could be happening.


Webster's Dictionary, actually, and it only had 3 definitions. Either way my point still stands, intellegent design is still a legitimate theory whether you believe it or not. I don't believe in the big bang theory, I think its rediculas really, but I still consider it a legitimate theory, as I know that everyone is different and has different views on everything. To say intelligent design is ignorant.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Glitch
Blasphemer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
Webster's Dictionary, actually, and it only had 3 definitions.  Either way my point still stands, intellegent design is still a legitimate theory whether you believe it or not.  I don't believe in the big bang theory, I think its rediculas really, but I still consider it a legitimate theory, as I know that everyone is different and has different views on everything.  To say intelligent design is ignorant.

You are not listening to anything I say.
A scientific theory has to have experimental data backing it up. Find me a single experiment conducted on intelligent design and I will reconsider my opinion on the matter.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sw33t_DreamZ
Member Avatar
Busy Momma
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I read everything you said I basically said I dont agree with it and think neither evolution nor creationism or intelligent design should be taught as fact in school
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Glitch
Blasphemer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Sw33t_DreamZ
Dec 22 2005, 04:34 PM
I read everything you said I basically said I dont agree with it and think neither evolution nor creationism or intelligent design should be taught as fact in school

Evolution is not taught as fact. In any science class, students are taught the scientific method at the beginning of the year. The scientific method shows that science is conducted through making educated hypotheses, and then testing them through experimentation and recording the results.
Evolution is not foolproof, nor is it definite fact. Darwin's original theory did in fact have many holes in it. However, science changes as we make new discoveries. A scientific theory such as evolution is the culmination of all the data that we have found and observed over the years. I challenge you to try and disprove any aspect of evolution scientifically. You cannot.

If you don't think evolution, a perfectly viable scientific theory, should be taught in school, then let's just take science out of the cirriculum completely! :rolleyes:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Community Chat · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 3