Re: Let science deal in facts, not religious conjecture

>
> Definitely disagree. Schools are a place of learning. What you propose is
> that schools be a place of "selective" learning; learning which is
> controlled by a selective group of educators and thereby diminish the
> intent of educating.

Nick,

We're going to have to agree to disagree. I can't seem to get across that
science does not have to be able to produce life in order to be correct in
its investigation and conclusions with regard to the beginnings of life.
What on earth makes you think this is necessary. Science does not pretend
to be God.

Has science ever been wrong? Of course. But most scientific errors point
the way to further scientific truths. Even still, science in its many
variations, biology, chemistry, botany, archeology, mineralogy,
paleontology, etc. are valid educational studies because science in one way
or another affects everyone.

On the other hand, religion or faith is valid as a study only in the homes
and churches because it affects only the faithful, or only those who believe
in certain ways. Otherwise, the study of religion is forced on those who do
not believe. It also begs the question: Whose faith-based version of the
origins of life are we to believe? How about we go back to the ancient Hopi
whose beliefs echo those of the ancient Sumerians (a belief system much
older than the bible). http://www.crystalinks.com/hopicreation.html

A scientific version of the origin of life is based on scientific fact. The
religious view is based on faith that has no foundation other than the
belief of the faithful. I personally believe in God, a supreme being who
caused creation to be. I will not impose that belief on others. It is not
right to do so because my belief has no foundation other than my belief.

Barbara


.

Relevant Pages

  • FIVU: New, "then and now" ( THEORETICAL COMMENTARY)
    ... The structural antropology and social science theories are to the ... ontological Theory of Process as the nano hole to its product ... the exact nature of that influence is not easy to define. ... element of social and psychological life has meaning only in relation ...
    (soc.culture.usa)
  • FIVU: New, "then and now" ( THEORETICAL COMMENTARY)
    ... The structural antropology and social science theories are to the ... ontological Theory of Process as the nano hole to its product ... the exact nature of that influence is not easy to define. ... element of social and psychological life has meaning only in relation ...
    (soc.culture.europe)
  • FIVU: New, "then and now" ( THEORETICAL COMMENTARY)
    ... The structural antropology and social science theories are to the ... ontological Theory of Process as the nano hole to its product ... the exact nature of that influence is not easy to define. ... element of social and psychological life has meaning only in relation ...
    (soc.culture.jewish)
  • FIVU: New, "then and now" ( THEORETICAL COMMENTARY)
    ... The structural antropology and social science theories are to the ... ontological Theory of Process as the nano hole to its product ... the exact nature of that influence is not easy to define. ... element of social and psychological life has meaning only in relation ...
    (soc.culture.polish)
  • Re: Atheists are the biggest fools on Earth
    ... We're talking about evolution, which is orthogonal. ... Science has shown that this is not the case. ... >>>to all life and explains everything. ... >>eukaryotes are related through a single common ancestor. ...
    (talk.origins)
Loading