Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Professor Slams Intelligent Design

Intelligent Design Science Education

  • Please log in to reply
138 replies to this topic

#21 Lord of the Sword

Lord of the Sword
  • Islander
  • 15,681 posts

Posted 13 October 2005 - 03:16 PM

*Shakes his head*

Alright, what, exactly, is wrong with presenting BOTH ideas and letting the students decide for themselves? Are parent's that insecure about their own beliefs that they tried to raise their child with? My GOD!
"Sometimes you get the point of the sword, sometimes the edge, sometimes the flat of the blade (even if you're the Lord of the Sword) and sometimes you're the guy wielding it. But any day without the Sword or its Lord is one that could've been better  " ~Orpheus.

The Left is inclusive, and tolerant, unless you happen to think and believe different than they do~ Lord of the Sword

Looks like the Liberal Elite of Exisle have finally managed to silence the last remaining Conservative voice on the board.

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.” ~Thomas Jefferson

#22 WildChildCait

WildChildCait

    And from the ashes of fire, she is reborn

  • Islander
  • 3,416 posts

Posted 13 October 2005 - 03:50 PM

why just both? What about other creatonist beliefs?
RIP Ruby Medallion: 31-10-1999/21-05-2007
one gender-reassigned, world travelling, world class snake.

FKA Chaddee, amongst other things.
http://scentedalchemy.webs.com Custom handmade bath and body products

#23 Godeskian

Godeskian

    You'll be seein' rainbooms

  • Islander
  • 26,839 posts

Posted 13 October 2005 - 04:18 PM

LORD of the SWORD, on Oct 13 2005, 09:16 PM, said:

*Shakes his head*

Alright, what, exactly, is wrong with presenting BOTH ideas and letting the students decide for themselves? Are parent's that insecure about their own beliefs that they tried to raise their child with? My GOD!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Because one is science and one isn't. This isn't about insecurity in beliefs, it's about the fact that science class is for science. ID may be many things, but it is not science.

Defy Gravity!


The Doctor: The universe is big. It's vast and complicated and ridiculous and sometimes, very rarely, impossible things just happen and we call them miracles... and that's a theory. Nine hundred years and I've never seen one yet, but this will do me.


#24 Lin731

Lin731
  • Islander
  • 4,126 posts

Posted 13 October 2005 - 04:39 PM

Quote

Alright, what, exactly, is wrong with presenting BOTH ideas and letting the students decide for themselves? Are parent's that insecure about their own beliefs that they tried to raise their child with? My GOD!


It's about Science LoTS, not insecurity about beleifs. I don't want theology in the cloak of science (particularly when ID hasn't a leg to stand on in that regard). Let's try the "let the students decide" approach to other subjects...like let's say witch burning...An alternate theory holds that those killed actually were witches doing the Devils bidding and completely justified...Let's throw that theory out there and let the students decide. How about teaching the alternate theory on the Moon Landing...after all many beleive that was faked, that we never landed there. Skinheads hold that whites are the master race there for Hitler was really a hero, let's teach that too...I know they're extreme examples LoTS but as a parent of a high school student, I don't want NON science taught in science class and that's what ID is. Alternate implies there is justification for the alternative and there isn't any with ID.
Posted Image
Posted Image

#25 Rhea

Rhea

  • Islander
  • 16,433 posts

Posted 13 October 2005 - 04:46 PM

LORD of the SWORD, on Oct 13 2005, 12:16 PM, said:

*Shakes his head*

Alright, what, exactly, is wrong with presenting BOTH ideas and letting the students decide for themselves? Are parent's that insecure about their own beliefs that they tried to raise their child with? My GOD!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


I think that the problem is that one is science and the other is theology. Presenting both in a science class is bound to muddy the waters.
The future is better than the past. Despite the crepehangers, romanticists, and anti-intellectuals, the world steadily grows better because the human mind, applying itself to environment, makes it better. With hands...with tools...with horse sense and science and engineering.
- Robert A. Heinlein

When I don’t understand, I have an unbearable itch to know why. - RAH


Everything is theoretically impossible, until it is done. One could write a history of science in reverse by assembling the solemn pronouncements of highest authority about what could not be done and could never happen.  - RAH

#26 Delvo

Delvo
  • Islander
  • 9,273 posts

Posted 13 October 2005 - 05:40 PM

If I were a science teacher, I'd relish the opportunity to address Incompetent Design, in order to show all that's wrong with it. Then my students would be more immune to its trickery when someone tries to pull it on them later on than they would have been if I'd tried to stifle it by saying nothing about it myself... and I'd have one of the greatest examples in the world to use for teaching general scientific debate and deception methods and how to analyze other people's claims about science, which can also be useful knowledge for application to other scientific subjects as well.

But I suspect that part of the problem is that a lot of teachers wouldn't know exactly how to give it that kind of treatment themselves and would really be unable to muster an adequate response to some of the tactics ID people use... which would only make ID look more valid to observers if they tried.

#27 WildChildCait

WildChildCait

    And from the ashes of fire, she is reborn

  • Islander
  • 3,416 posts

Posted 13 October 2005 - 05:54 PM

maybe we should teach science in religion class as well?
RIP Ruby Medallion: 31-10-1999/21-05-2007
one gender-reassigned, world travelling, world class snake.

FKA Chaddee, amongst other things.
http://scentedalchemy.webs.com Custom handmade bath and body products

#28 Eskaminzim

Eskaminzim

    Head eggs and butt toast

  • Islander
  • 559 posts

Posted 13 October 2005 - 06:17 PM

I honestly don't understand why something like this would "need" to be taught in school anyway.

Most (not all, I'm sure, but MOST) kids who would tend toward belief in ID have already heard it in their houses of worship since they were old enough to understand what their priest/pastor/whomever was talking about.  

They would already know the Creation Story, having been taught it at church for as long as they've been alive.  And ID is really nothing more than the Creation Story broken down to its most basic level:  "God created the earth and all that is in it."  Period.

Well, if they're going to believe that, they believe it already.  It's not exactly something new that's being sprung on them.  So what possible good would it serve teaching it in school?  What would you learn that was new?

It's not science.  It's religion.  It presupposes that there is a creator, and that is the essence of the word 'religion'.  Belief in a creator.

It just seems like a huge step backward to me.  It harkens back to "well, since we don't understand what causes sickness, it MUST be a punishment for God for our sins."  "If we don't understand why we immediately fall back to earth when we jump, it MUST be because God installed giant Hoovers in the planet's center".

I hate the thought that if we do not fully understand something, it must be because God created it.  That implies that we have no more to learn, and actually impedes any learning because hey, if we just leave it up to God, why bother learning anything about anything?  

We can all go back to not washing our hands and taking a dump where we feel like it because illness isn't caused by germs or viruses or anything like that. Nope. It's all God.

#29 Nonny

Nonny

    Scourge of Pretentious Bad Latin

  • Islander
  • 31,142 posts

Posted 13 October 2005 - 06:52 PM

Jid, on Oct 13 2005, 08:15 AM, said:

Godeskian, on Oct 13 2005, 10:01 AM, said:

I asume that all the ID proponents also support other non-christian creation and existence to be taught as alternatives?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Like, perchance, FSMism Gode? ;)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Pastafarians?!  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  

I am so ordering the FSM thingee for my car.  I'm ordering a bunch, cuz I know they'll get stolen.  :rolleyes:  

:ninjadeath:  

Nonny
Posted Image


The once and future Nonny

"Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank, give a man a bank and he can rob the world." Can anyone tell me who I am quoting?  I found this with no attribution.

Fatal miscarriages are forever.

Stupid is stupid, this I believe. And ignorance is the worst kind of stupid, since ignorance is a choice.  Suzanne Brockmann

All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings. Diderot

#30 Nonny

Nonny

    Scourge of Pretentious Bad Latin

  • Islander
  • 31,142 posts

Posted 13 October 2005 - 07:04 PM

It dawned on me last night that ID is very much like something I came up with for my scifi trilogy.  Of course, I also came up with my own deity.  :)  

Nonny
Posted Image


The once and future Nonny

"Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank, give a man a bank and he can rob the world." Can anyone tell me who I am quoting?  I found this with no attribution.

Fatal miscarriages are forever.

Stupid is stupid, this I believe. And ignorance is the worst kind of stupid, since ignorance is a choice.  Suzanne Brockmann

All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings. Diderot

#31 waterpanther

waterpanther
  • Islander
  • 1,944 posts

Posted 13 October 2005 - 10:19 PM

Quote

Like, perchance, FSMism Gode?

May all be touched by his noodly appendage.   :angel:
Posted Image

#32 Jid

Jid

    Mad Prophet of Funk

  • Islander
  • 12,554 posts

Posted 13 October 2005 - 10:32 PM

enTranced, on Oct 13 2005, 11:56 AM, said:

Jid!!!

Thank you for linking to that site!

Best! Site! Ever!  :cool:

enTranced

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Welcomes.  I do enjoy it.


Nonny, on Oct 13 2005, 05:52 PM, said:

I am so ordering the FSM thingee for my car.  I'm ordering a bunch, cuz I know they'll get stolen.  :rolleyes: 

:ninjadeath: 

Nonny

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I thought they were decals?  Or is there a chrome one now?

waterpanther, on Oct 13 2005, 09:19 PM, said:

May all be touched by his noodly appendage.   :angel:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

RAmen. ;)

Seriously, I linked the site because it strikes me as a valid (if satirical) criticism of ID and its proponents.  I just don't think faith ought to be instructed in a science class.

Edited by Jid, 13 October 2005 - 10:33 PM.

cervisiam tene rem specta

#33 waterpanther

waterpanther
  • Islander
  • 1,944 posts

Posted 13 October 2005 - 10:34 PM

Ah, but there's proof of the FSM's existence!  Behold:


Quote

BEIJING (Oct. 13) - And you thought your leftovers were old. A 4,000-year-old bowl of noodles has been discovered at an archaeological site in western China - possible proof for the argument that China invented pasta before Italy.

"These are definitely the earliest noodles ever found," said Lu Houyuan, a researcher with the Institute of Geology in Beijing who studied the ingredients of the pristinely preserved pasta.

The discovery of the delicate yellow noodles in Minhe County in the province of Qinghai is reported in this week's edition of Nature magazine.<snip>

The noodles were made from a dough of two local varieties of millet - broomcorn and foxtail millet - rather than the more common wheat or rice. The dough was pulled into long strands before being boiled.

http://aolsvc.news.a...dp?id=20051013...

Posted Image

#34 Lord of the Sword

Lord of the Sword
  • Islander
  • 15,681 posts

Posted 14 October 2005 - 12:20 AM

Godeskian, on Oct 13 2005, 04:18 PM, said:

Because one is science and one isn't. This isn't about insecurity in beliefs, it's about the fact that science class is for science. ID may be many things, but it is not science.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Hmmm. Interesting. And how long ago was it that it was taught that the world was flat. Back then it was considered FACT! Or, how bout the belief that the world WAS the center of the universe, and everything revolved around it, which was also taught as FACT!

So the whole excuse of: "it isn't science fact" is BS IMO.
"Sometimes you get the point of the sword, sometimes the edge, sometimes the flat of the blade (even if you're the Lord of the Sword) and sometimes you're the guy wielding it. But any day without the Sword or its Lord is one that could've been better  " ~Orpheus.

The Left is inclusive, and tolerant, unless you happen to think and believe different than they do~ Lord of the Sword

Looks like the Liberal Elite of Exisle have finally managed to silence the last remaining Conservative voice on the board.

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.” ~Thomas Jefferson

#35 Lord of the Sword

Lord of the Sword
  • Islander
  • 15,681 posts

Posted 14 October 2005 - 12:26 AM

Eskaminzim, on Oct 13 2005, 06:17 PM, said:

It's not science.  It's religion.  It presupposes that there is a creator, and that is the essence of the word 'religion'.  Belief in a creator.

It just seems like a huge step backward to me. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


I see. So the fact that it implies a Creator...Something even the founding father believed in, is the problem. Fair enough. Those who don't want to believe in it, please stop using any and all money...since it has the words "In GOD we trust" on it.

Afterall, GOD is not science fact.
"Sometimes you get the point of the sword, sometimes the edge, sometimes the flat of the blade (even if you're the Lord of the Sword) and sometimes you're the guy wielding it. But any day without the Sword or its Lord is one that could've been better  " ~Orpheus.

The Left is inclusive, and tolerant, unless you happen to think and believe different than they do~ Lord of the Sword

Looks like the Liberal Elite of Exisle have finally managed to silence the last remaining Conservative voice on the board.

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.” ~Thomas Jefferson

#36 Godeskian

Godeskian

    You'll be seein' rainbooms

  • Islander
  • 26,839 posts

Posted 14 October 2005 - 01:22 AM

LORD of the SWORD, on Oct 14 2005, 06:20 AM, said:

Hmmm. Interesting. And how long ago was it that it was taught that the world was flat. Back then it was considered FACT! Or, how bout the belief that the world WAS the center of the universe, and everything revolved around it, which was also taught as FACT!

These beliefs were also disproved by science, not religion. In fact, it wasn't till this last century when the church finally got around to apologising and admitting Galileo was right and they were wrong.

What's more your comment does not adress the simple point that religion does not belong in science class. Science class is for science. ID does not fullfill basic criteria for being a scientific theory, ergo, it belongs in science class no more than than Hindi creation myths, FSMism or anything else that is not science.

Defy Gravity!


The Doctor: The universe is big. It's vast and complicated and ridiculous and sometimes, very rarely, impossible things just happen and we call them miracles... and that's a theory. Nine hundred years and I've never seen one yet, but this will do me.


#37 Godeskian

Godeskian

    You'll be seein' rainbooms

  • Islander
  • 26,839 posts

Posted 14 October 2005 - 01:24 AM

LORD of the SWORD, on Oct 14 2005, 06:26 AM, said:

I see. So the fact that it implies a Creator...Something even the founding father believed in, is the problem. Fair enough. Those who don't want to believe in it, please stop using any and all money...since it has the words "In GOD we trust" on it.

Afterall, GOD is not science fact.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


the original US currency didn't carry 'in God we trust'. That was added later, by a movement steeped in religion.

http://www.treas.gov...d-we-trust.html

It's the US treasury department website that contains a history of the phrase.

Quote

The motto IN GOD WE TRUST was placed on United States coins largely because of the increased religious sentiment existing during the Civil War. Secretary of the Treasury Salmon P. Chase received many appeals from devout persons throughout the country, urging that the United States recognize the Deity on United States coins

This is also totally irrelevant to the subject at hand, but it was a fun read nonetheless.

Also there is this false dichotomy that religion and science can't get along, which I find patently absurd. Please remember that the absence of evidence is not, and has never been evidence of absence.

Edited by Godeskian, 14 October 2005 - 01:26 AM.

Defy Gravity!


The Doctor: The universe is big. It's vast and complicated and ridiculous and sometimes, very rarely, impossible things just happen and we call them miracles... and that's a theory. Nine hundred years and I've never seen one yet, but this will do me.


#38 Lord of the Sword

Lord of the Sword
  • Islander
  • 15,681 posts

Posted 14 October 2005 - 02:26 AM

Godeskian, on Oct 14 2005, 01:22 AM, said:

What's more your comment does not adress the simple point that religion does not belong in science class. Science class is for science. ID does not fullfill basic criteria for being a scientific theory, ergo, it belongs in science class no more than than Hindi creation myths, FSMism or anything else that is not science.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


It does, to a degree, if that class is dealing with the origins of all life. Unless of course you're saying that the students should be taught that the combination that brought all life into existence, happened just by chance. I can't even imagine what the odds are on that. Hell, even Casinos wouldn't take that bet.
"Sometimes you get the point of the sword, sometimes the edge, sometimes the flat of the blade (even if you're the Lord of the Sword) and sometimes you're the guy wielding it. But any day without the Sword or its Lord is one that could've been better  " ~Orpheus.

The Left is inclusive, and tolerant, unless you happen to think and believe different than they do~ Lord of the Sword

Looks like the Liberal Elite of Exisle have finally managed to silence the last remaining Conservative voice on the board.

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.” ~Thomas Jefferson

#39 Godeskian

Godeskian

    You'll be seein' rainbooms

  • Islander
  • 26,839 posts

Posted 14 October 2005 - 02:54 AM

LORD of the SWORD, on Oct 14 2005, 08:26 AM, said:

It does, to a degree, if that class is dealing with the origins of all life. Unless of course you're saying that the students should be taught that the combination that brought all life into existence, happened just by chance. I can't even imagine what the odds are on that. Hell, even Casinos wouldn't take that bet.

Setting aside your misconceptions of origin of life for a moment, ID still wouldn't be applicable because it is not a scientific theory. It has no hallmarks of scientific theories. It is unfalsifiable, so it's not a scientific theory. It makes no predictions so it's not a scientific theory. It is untestable, so it's not a scientific theory.

The list goes on and on, and at the end of it, the same thing occurs. ID is still not a scientific theory. If you want to put forward an alternate scientifictheory of the origin of life, then it needs to be a scientific theory in the first place. Otherwise it categorically does not belong in science class.

You keep saying you want it presented as an alternate theory, but you keep missing about the bit about presenting it in science class as an alternatice scientific theory.

If you want to present it as an alternative outside of science class, then i'm down with that. But inside science class, it has to be a scientific theory.

Defy Gravity!


The Doctor: The universe is big. It's vast and complicated and ridiculous and sometimes, very rarely, impossible things just happen and we call them miracles... and that's a theory. Nine hundred years and I've never seen one yet, but this will do me.


#40 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 5,137 posts

Posted 14 October 2005 - 05:22 AM

I want to bring back throwing Christians to the lions, just so's I can watch a few argue "intelligent design" with a hungry lion. I'd like to toss some Buddists in with them, so they can lecture me about karma as they're being eaten.

The Dalai Lama said recently in an interview that the "reason" for Hurricane Katrina was "bad karma". Seems to me that sort of thinking smacks of the belief in "Intelligent" Design.

Another similar wacky belief is one I can't remember the name of off-hand, but it's a belief that the planet is a conscious, living organism. If I recall rightly, it was mentioned in Final Fantasy. It was something like "Gaya", or something like that.

When I was a kid, I used to wonder if maybe existence itself possessed self-awareness. What got me thinking that way was thinking that, since we're part of existence, and since we're alive and aware, that maybe being alive and aware is a potential in all of existence.

But that's where things fell apart. Potential ain't the same animule as actual.

Frankly, I can't find any difference between "Creationism" and "Intelligent" Design. I think it's just Creationism with a slightly different spin.
Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Intelligent Design, Science, Education

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users