Re: Article: Bush Remarks On 'Intelligent Design' Theory Fuel Debate

dfritzin@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> ed wrote:
> > John Savard wrote:
> > > On Wed, 03 Aug 2005 07:56:39 GMT, "ed"
> > > <news_test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote, in part:
> > >
> > > >teaching religion does not leave kids behind in the sciences- some
> > > >absolutely brilliant scientific minds were true believers.
> > > >what's important
> > > >is how it's taught- what causes kids to be left behind is not having
> > > >critical thinking skills- and that is not mutually independant of faith.
> > >
> > > Yes, but introducing Creationism into education is an attempt to destroy
> > > critical thinking skills.
> >
> > no, it's not. it depends on how it's taught. it can stimulate debate
> > and thought.
>
> And, teaching different creation beliefs is fine. Just not in a science
> class. Or, if it must be taught in a science class, in a history of
> science class, where outmoded, disproven ideas are explained, as well
> as how science has disproven them.

i absolutely disagree for several reasons-
1- by stating that it's outmoded and disproven upfront, you stifle
thought and debate.
2- how can science disprove something like intelligent design? you can
show alternatives, but there's really NO way to absolutely DISPROVE it.

> > > The school system should not impose any religious belief.
> >
> > teaching different theories on how species came to being does not do
> > this.
>
> OK, what are the other theories?

intelligent design is one of them. and it doesn't even conflict with
the basic idea of evolution. =D

> Are there any with actual evidence
> supporting them?

the supporters certainly think so. =D what, you don't think there are
other theories? even natural selection, while widely accepted in the
scientific community, still has competing theories, including
intelligent design, which has had papers published on it in reputable
peer reviewed journals.

> > > Since some
> > > religious denominations do take the creation story literally, though,
> > > teaching that it is false is _also_ teaching a particular religious
> > > belief. The solution to that is presenting evolution as an allegation -
> > > not falsely claiming that there is any real doubt about it, or any valid
> > > alternatives to it.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Definition of ID?
    ... You may find it useful to distinguish between "intelligent design", ... came on board with their BTWBS pretense at science. ... With the crushing defeat of the creation "science" movement, ... Discovery Institute, and the Center for Science and Culture remains the ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Greetings from Idiot America
    ... The dinosaurs are the first things you see when you enter the Creation ... accumulated science of the past 150-odd years take away all the rest of it? ... Fights over evolution -- and its faddish new camouflage, intelligent design, ... Idiot America is not the place where people say silly things. ...
    (talk.atheism)
  • Re: Greetings from Idiot America
    ... The dinosaurs are the first things you see when you enter the Creation ... accumulated science of the past 150-odd years take away all the rest of it? ... Fights over evolution -- and its faddish new camouflage, intelligent design, ... Idiot America is not the place where people say silly things. ...
    (talk.atheism)
  • Re: Flank fails to offer a single quote from any creationist
    ... majority of creationists use the Bible as a Science Text. ... Divine Creation contained in Genesis." ... -- Henry Morris (Morris, ... called the theory of intelligent design. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • In the News: Darwin at risk in Canada
    ... "The occurrence of evolution is no longer debated in the scientific literature," ... The place of intelligent design (the notion that a sentient creator must have ... This fall, Peter Sparrow, a science teacher, will bring his Creation Bus through ...
    (talk.origins)