Jump to content


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

Details in this thread

Physicist, Claims Teaching Creationism Is Child Abuse

Creationism science

  • Please log in to reply
91 replies to this topic

#21 Balderdash

Balderdash
  • Islander
  • 5,729 posts

Posted 18 February 2013 - 09:23 AM

View PostNikcara, on 17 February 2013 - 05:03 PM, said:

I was using Christianity as an example because only Christians have been pushing creationism in science classes in America as far as I'm aware, and one of the stated reasons for it is to promote the belief in Christianity.  I'm actually not atheist, but if someone could scientifically prove to me that the Christian god (or any other specific deity/deities) was the one true god they'd have much more of my attention than the typical circular "this is what I believe because this is what I believe" argument that faith generally boils down to.  I think that's what the people really pushing for creationism in science are really going for - they want to "scientifically" prove that their god and faith is the right one to convince people like me to join them.  I also think part of it stems from their own doubts - they want so badly to prove their faith is right, not just to unbelievers but to themselves as well, that they are willing to blind themselves to mountains of evidence and insist that all parts of the Bible are literally true just so they can feel that they are being 'good Christians'.

See, I don't understand how they can teach creationism because there is nothing to teach except "because I said so."   Their way around the mountains of evidence is to
say that their god planted the mountain of evidence to confuse the issue. You have to have faith to be able to see the truth.  Sorry but I think it's something other than
faith that causes people to believe crazy stuff like that.  How are you supposed to go out in the world and sell your religion, like the Christian god tells you to do saddled
with such ridiculous junk.  And then brainwash your children and send them out into the world where they are going to be scorned.

Another Democrat leaning Independent that has to search for truth because it can't be found on Fox News OR MSNBC.



"Being gay is not a Western invention, it is a human reality"  by HRC


#22 Themis

Themis
  • Islander
  • 6,544 posts

Posted 18 February 2013 - 11:18 AM

View Postsierraleone, on 17 February 2013 - 03:22 PM, said:

Saying God is perfect but our world (and the people in it) isn't and even though he has the power to change it (or to have designed the world/us better in the first place!) isn't easy to understand. So, for me, I figure that think this is what some people have to believe to feel better about the more unpalatable aspects of life as we know it. Because if their God is as advertised I figure such a God either designed badly and/or such a God wants it this way and I would not able to bring myself to respect such a God for that. Or God is remote and/or busy with other things (which sort of contradict God's advertised powers doesn't it?).

Precisely my feelings.  Specifically the bad design idea.  Aside from certain aspects of weather and things like earthquakes and meteors hitting the planet, I've always felt that making females go through pain (and mess) once a month for most of their adult lives on the off chance that they might have sex and, also not guaranteed, fertilize an egg was incredibly poor design.  And there was no way I could worship such a poor designer.  I've also felt that any entity encompassing the 4 O's you mention had to be incredibly insecure to want to be worshipped.  The big difference between the Abrahamic religious myths and things like Greek and Norse mythology is that somebody eventually wrote them down, making them seem more real and making them easier to pass on to other tribes and civilizations.

BTW, why is it that it is fundamentalist Christians who push for teaching creationism when the story is in the first paragraphs of the first book of the OLD testament?  The Jews had that version of the creation myth for a lot longer and they don't seem to be pushing for it to be part of science classes.?!?!?!  Or am I mistaken on that point?
Cats will never be extinct!

#23 Nonny

Nonny

    Scourge of Pretentious Bad Latin

  • Islander
  • 31,142 posts

Posted 18 February 2013 - 11:51 AM

View PostBalderdash, on 18 February 2013 - 09:23 AM, said:

See, I don't understand how they can teach creationism because there is nothing to teach except "because I said so."

That's why they want to grab hold of hearts and minds as young as they can.  Impressionable and all that.

My regrets over my wasted grade school education opportunities, hijacked by Catholic school, seem to be giving way to rage these days.
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

#24 Tricia

Tricia

    To err on the side of kindness is seldom an error.

  • Islander
  • 10,245 posts

Posted 18 February 2013 - 11:58 AM

I could tell you what my favorite former pastor said about all that....but that's just his theory and the way he taught. And I doubt I could explain it the way he did.

He believed that both creationism and evolution co-exist.  He did not deny one thing just because there was evidence of the other.

As to that last question of Themis'---I'm not sure about that answer because I've only heard of the Evangelical Christians pushing for teaching creationism only. Might have to ask around with a few of my friends who are Jewish but after being caught between an atheist friend and a Christian friend in THAT argument yesterday I'm not inclined to go there anytime soon.     and so I bow out of this thread.

Edited by Tricia, 18 February 2013 - 12:24 PM.

In true dialogue, both sides are willing to change. --Thich Nhat Hanh


You don't need to attend every argument you are invited to


Do not ask that your kids live up to your expectations.  Let your kids be who they are, and your expectations will be in breathless pursuit.


#25 offworlder

offworlder

    pls don't kick offworlders, we can find a place too

  • Islander
  • 5,363 posts

Posted 18 February 2013 - 03:15 PM

or after that scientific proof then convert to Islam?
;)
but I thought, I have not really heard the theologians explain these things you see pop up in these online chats with us riffraff; and I admit no one I know knows any theologians; where are they? where do they keep to themselves? do they hide? ; I would like to hear some monsignor DDiv explain some of this with the omniperfect, omnipotent, omniscience ideas, and the making women have periods and cramps and all the other stuff you guys have brought up- HEre it is, I say, no, I pronounce: I want to see the new Pope earn, yes Earn, his big gold throne in the Basilica by explaining all these things, these perfect and omni and design things , and Creationist issues, and the matching of the Bible to these issues today, and how God wants all these so-far-from-perfect horrid things we have in our world. - And even though I am a believing Christian dont even get me STarted on the literal Bible stuff when it was written long ago by some Greeks from some ole Jewish stories where down through all the tellings with grandchildren now grandparents tell what their grans told them, And kept it perfectly The Same??, all from some myth stories hundreds of years before, and it's all supposed to be the literal words of God?
"(Do you read what they say online?) I check out all these scandalous rumours about me and Elijah Wood having beautiful sex with each other ... (are they true?) About Elijah and me being boyfriend and boyfriend? Absolutely true. We've been together for about nine years. I wooed him. No I just like a lot of stuff - I like that someone says one thing and it becomes fact. It's kind of fun." --Dominic Monaghan in a phone interview with Newsweek while buying DVDs at the store. :D

#26 QueenTiye

QueenTiye

    Behavior is not reproducible over multiple trials.

  • Islander
  • 24,302 posts

Posted 18 February 2013 - 05:13 PM

I can't agree with this.  While I am vehemently opposed to young-earth Creationism, unless actual harm is going to come to the child, then this is a step too far.  Is the child going to die from thinking the earth is 6000 years old? No. No more than they would die thinking that the US is 17 feet across.  Is the child going to fail to be emotionally secure for having that belief?  Show me proof that people are incapable of growing up to be functional human beings with full emotional capacity for believing the earth is 6000 years old, and you have a case.  Otherwise, nope.  This is an infringement of the highest order.

I DO believe that public schools should be required to teach the best available science. But will homeschooled/private schooled kids fall apart for learning fiction as truth? Doubtful.

QT

Een Draght Mackt Maght


#27 QueenTiye

QueenTiye

    Behavior is not reproducible over multiple trials.

  • Islander
  • 24,302 posts

Posted 18 February 2013 - 05:34 PM

View Postsierraleone, on 17 February 2013 - 03:22 PM, said:

Creator of the universe?
Sustainer of the universe?
Eternal?
Unchanging? Or changing? (for example, old testament verses new testament. Did God change, or not?)

Omniscience? (infinite/unlimited knowledge)
Omnipotent? (unlimited power)
Omnipresent (present everywhere)
Omnibenevolence? (perfect goodness)


Well, I believe that variations of God that we see pertain to our understanding of God at any time.  At the time of the Old Testament, God seemed one way to humanity, and today, God seems another way - but that evolution of God is with us, not with God.  And, as we grow and evolve, God provides new instructions suitable to our stage of development.  In short - it is we who are young and changing, not God.

I was reading somewhere an article that posited that we are becoming more non-violent, and that our brains are actually changing in response to this increased non-violent impulse.  That is to say - humanity today is significantly different than it was a thousand years ago, at least partly because of the ascendance of certain ideas as normative.   To me this confirms the process of progressive revelation - namely that each teacher from God comes at a specific time, teaches specific principles and over time those principles become more normative - and change humanity.  At which point another revelation will become necessary because we just aren't the same as we were before.

QT

Een Draght Mackt Maght


#28 Cait

Cait

    Democracy Dies in Darkness

  • Moderator
  • 10,810 posts

Posted 18 February 2013 - 05:59 PM

View PostQueenTiye, on 18 February 2013 - 05:34 PM, said:

View Postsierraleone, on 17 February 2013 - 03:22 PM, said:

Creator of the universe?
Sustainer of the universe?
Eternal?
Unchanging? Or changing? (for example, old testament verses new testament. Did God change, or not?)

Omniscience? (infinite/unlimited knowledge)
Omnipotent? (unlimited power)
Omnipresent (present everywhere)
Omnibenevolence? (perfect goodness)


To me this confirms the process of progressive revelation - namely that each teacher from God comes at a specific time, teaches specific principles and over time those principles become more normative - and change humanity.  At which point another revelation will become necessary because we just aren't the same as we were before.


This is put very well.  I agree.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.

Source:
http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html


#29 Lin731

Lin731
  • Islander
  • 4,126 posts

Posted 18 February 2013 - 08:32 PM

Quote

I was reading somewhere an article that posited that we are becoming more non-violent, and that our brains are actually changing in response to this increased non-violent impulse.  That is to say - humanity today is significantly different than it was a thousand years ago, at least partly because of the ascendance of certain ideas as normative.   To me this confirms the process of progressive revelation - namely that each teacher from God comes at a specific time, teaches specific principles and over time those principles become more normative - and change humanity.  At which point another revelation will become necessary because we just aren't the same as we were before.


While I disagree to some extent with this, I thought it very well said. If our religious beleifs can evolve based on the teacher, I fear it can also devolve as well based on the teacher/teachings. Look what has happened in the middle east, or during WW2 Germany. One distorting christianity and using it to help justify the slaughter of millions, and the current forms of Islam which can lead to a young girl almost being murdered for wanting an education? Women starving to death in their homes because all the male family is dead and they aren't allowed in the streets unescorted. The average person may be less inclined to violence but it may also make them more likely to be the victim of it by those who ARE still driven by violence. Look at all the murders in this country to this day. It only takes a small number of hateful, violent people to create fear in the rest of us.

AS to Creationism being child abuse...For me that's a stretch to compare real violence to teaching what IMO is a wanton ignorance of science. Don't get me wrong, it ticks me off that it's rammed down unsuspecting kids throats but I don't think it falls into the same category as molesting little kids, beating them etc...I DO wonder how any school is allowed to teach it in a science class. If Christian schools want to teach it, fine but do it in a religious class not science. Are there no standards at all in christian schools? Growing up in public school, there was never a problem referring to Greek, Roman, Norse etc...as mythology used to explain things that people lacked the knowledge to explain in any other way. Now was that ever applied to beleiving in Christianty? Ummm no but you could draw on those mytholgy classes to draw your own conclusions. It wasn't discussed but it definately was left open to your own interpetation.
Posted Image
Posted Image

#30 Balderdash

Balderdash
  • Islander
  • 5,729 posts

Posted 18 February 2013 - 08:57 PM

View PostQueenTiye, on 18 February 2013 - 05:13 PM, said:

I can't agree with this.  While I am vehemently opposed to young-earth Creationism, unless actual harm is going to come to the child, then this is a step too far.  Is the child going to die from thinking the earth is 6000 years old? No. No more than they would die thinking that the US is 17 feet across.  Is the child going to fail to be emotionally secure for having that belief?  Show me proof that people are incapable of growing up to be functional human beings with full emotional capacity for believing the earth is 6000 years old, and you have a case.  Otherwise, nope.  This is an infringement of the highest order.

I DO believe that public schools should be required to teach the best available science. But will homeschooled/private schooled kids fall apart for learning fiction as truth? Doubtful.

QT

What do you consider harm?  The guy said he felt it was a mild form of abuse, I personally think that it's more than mild but people disagree.
"This is an infringement of the highest order."  What!?  BS!  What is infringement?  Infringement of what?

Another Democrat leaning Independent that has to search for truth because it can't be found on Fox News OR MSNBC.



"Being gay is not a Western invention, it is a human reality"  by HRC


#31 Tricia

Tricia

    To err on the side of kindness is seldom an error.

  • Islander
  • 10,245 posts

Posted 18 February 2013 - 09:34 PM

Perhaps we need to clarify that this is some Christian schools, not all. Some homeschooled kids, not all.  Teaching creationism only, I mean.

It depends on the individual schools as well as the individuals.

Not all teach creationism as part of their curriculum or as part of the science class as a friend who does have children in a school run by the Lutheran church informed me when I asked about this issue. She asked her kids. Creationism was covered in their religious discussions class but was briefly mentioned in science class and only as a result of a student's question. Otherwise it was strictly science and evolution.

I personally do not believe that teaching creationism is a form of abuse, even mild.  It's not good to teach it as the only way of thought for sure because one should give their children all the schools of thought,  all the theories, all the things proven by science and fossils etc.  Discuss it, not preach it.



ETA--re-reading the link in the OP the implication is that he's criticizing parents for sharing their belief system with their child.  Not just for it being taught in school. Or that's the way I read that article with him only saying 'in the classroom', 'in school' when asked about it later. Also he does say in the article "teaching children creationism instead of evolution."

Believe me I've had to deal with the occasional teacher who decides to 'preach' to my child's class or spouts some wild idea that I have to counter.

May I also say that every year some child or the other does ask how creationism fits in with evolution in science class and they always do have a good discussion that day as to what the students ideas are and also the evidence of evolution.  I'm not crazy about it but those kids are bright and I have never heard of a single one of them denying evolution.  Approve of it or not but it does provide them with the all the info, all the theories,  to make their own decisions and they always go back to the regular science lesson plan after that.  And yes,usually they get into all the various creation mythologies too.  One teacher called it the discussion of the evolution of thought and knowledge. ;)  And then they get on with the actual science lesson.

hopefully I worded this the way I meant.

Edited by Tricia, 18 February 2013 - 10:06 PM.

In true dialogue, both sides are willing to change. --Thich Nhat Hanh


You don't need to attend every argument you are invited to


Do not ask that your kids live up to your expectations.  Let your kids be who they are, and your expectations will be in breathless pursuit.


#32 Mark

Mark
  • Islander
  • 5,269 posts

Posted 19 February 2013 - 01:12 AM

Mark: Since none of the creation theories (whether religious-related or not) have no absolute conclusions, I think all theories about the creation of the universe are fair game in a teaching environment.
Even if I choose not to believe in some of the American Indian's beliefs about creation, their thoughts and stories still furthers my overall knowledge of other cultures and their ancient traditional beliefs about creation. Science, and scientist have nearly always been smugly self-assured that their scientific way is the ONLY way. After all, it's the only belief system that is based on factual evidence, and tests that are repeatedly coming out with the same results. BUT...and this is a BIG BUT...science alone is not the only path we're allowed to take to discover truth. Science combined with many many other things help everybody discover things about ourselves and others. We all get a bit of perspective listening and learning about all the theories floating around about creation, and reality as we know it.

The truth is...NOBODY knows the ultimate truth about the creation of what we consider reality. We're all in the dark of space when it comes to how our universe was created. We're learning more all the time, but we've really just started. I also think science and religion aren't mutually exclusive...at least they don't have to be. Only the closed-minded shut out hearing other's theories and beliefs about creationism. There are many instances where leaders from science and religion have met in the middle, and discovered both sides have valid input into the theories humans have been pondering since the beginning of our beginning. Working together with open minds is how we can all benefit each other in our neverending search for both small and large truths regarding the grand scheme of things around us.

Putting effort into devaluing one set of beliefs without ffirst having absolute, and non-disputable facts is just silly. Besides, that activity takes away from my personal search for my own answers. It's hard to discover anything if we're all up in someone's face about how stupid we think they are because of what they choose to believe. Did the universe begin with a big bang? Probably so, but scientists don't have anything more than unprovable theories as to why that occured in the first place.
Perhaps it was God who blew the Universe into the exsitance we call, "reality". Then again...maybe what some people consider to be God was a just a scientist from another dimension who spilled a large beaker of very hot galaxies. LOL

I just consider it part of our human condition... that is, we're all destined to search for truths as best we can. I just don't want anybody getting in my way while I'm trying to figure it out for myself, and I certainly don't want to get in anyone else's way. Listening to other's people's opinions and beliefs is the best way to learn other ideas. Maybe someone else's ideas will help me in my quest for the truth of exsistence. True teachers should teach as many of the creation theories as their time allows. Just because one of the theories being taught is based in religious belief doesn't make it less valid. None of the theories have any proof whatsoever as to why our Universe came into being, and why we lifeforms are here and asking these questions.

Edited by Mark, 19 February 2013 - 01:19 AM.

Mark
Discussion is an exchange of knowledge: argument is an exchange of ignorance.
Peace is not the absence of conflict, but the ability to cope with it.
APOGEE MESSAGE BOARD

#33 BklnScott

BklnScott

    FKA ScottEVill

  • Islander
  • 18,142 posts

Posted 19 February 2013 - 08:22 AM

Mark, as you say, everyone is free to forge a metaphysical path toward their own "truth" - but that assumes an adult ability to distinguish between various theories drawn from various traditions, religious and scientific/mathematical included, doesn't it?  And that gets back to the (fairly important) subject of the thread: what we teach our children, and what it means both for them as individuals and for us as a society.

If we teach children that the fossil record (and indeed evolution itself) is god's little joke on mankind, are we also teaching them to distrust and discount science and mathematics?  (I'm reminded of the Bob Jones University Astronomy textbook that denies cosmological distances, black holes, quasars, et al - Like the fossil record, these are god's little joke on mankind.)

What are the implications for the individual child so taught?  (Will anyone argue that Bob Jones turns out astronomers employable in the field of astronomy?)  And what are the implications on a macro level?  A whole generation of children brought up to distrust and discount science?

Quote

There isn't enough mommy in the world to further a cause like yours!

#34 Mikoto

Mikoto

    Rejected on all levels.

  • Islander
  • 9,304 posts

Posted 19 February 2013 - 10:29 AM

View PostThemis, on 18 February 2013 - 11:18 AM, said:

Precisely my feelings.  Specifically the bad design idea.  Aside from certain aspects of weather and things like earthquakes and meteors hitting the planet, I've always felt that making females go through pain (and mess) once a month for most of their adult lives on the off chance that they might have sex and, also not guaranteed, fertilize an egg was incredibly poor design.  And there was no way I could worship such a poor designer.  

That and putting the 'playground' between the 'sewers' is poor design. As is making females, overall, significantly physically weaker than males. If there is a God, he set women up for thousands of years of abuse and sexism that still goes on even today. But that's slightly off topic.

I'm generally with the consensus that creationism shouldn't be taught in science classes. Science is about reality as we know it, and if taught correctly it just shows what tangible, real evidence implies.

God and religion requires faith, it's not based on what's real and tangible so, while it undoubtably has value to many people, the science classroom isn't the place for it.

Edited by Mikoto, 19 February 2013 - 10:36 AM.

Rejected and gone.

#35 Tricia

Tricia

    To err on the side of kindness is seldom an error.

  • Islander
  • 10,245 posts

Posted 19 February 2013 - 10:30 AM

I do consider saying that parents or teachers are abusing children by teaching them creationism to be wrong.

You would hope that the children get ALL the information available. Whether it is from school or their parents or additional sources.  In my case I learned that there was more to the world and things I had been taught in church and school....because I read books!  and now we have the Internet.  Too many sources to gain knowledge.  (wheterh one belives the info or not...that's a whole other thing)

My point being that the knowledge is out there for the finding no matter what you were taught as a child.  I've known too many people who were brought up in very structured and restricted  childhoods and none of them ceased their reading or learning just because of what they were taught as a child. Often college or just plain being out on their own and independent opened up their worlds.

I do have an objection to teaching ONLY creationism.  It's part of the whole evolution of what we thought we once knew.  But if the parent choses to teach only that, that's their choice.  But it can not be the only thing taught elsewhere such as public school or church schools operating as charter schools (which here are funded by the state)


And when people start throwing around words like 'child abuse' someone often thinks that necessitates legislation.  Would not be the first or last time that happened and we've discussed those type of laws, both proposed and passed , quite often here.

Teaching only creationism is, IMHO, highly irresponsible.  Not criminal.  (and when you call something child abuse that implies the criminal)

Edited by Tricia, 19 February 2013 - 10:42 AM.

In true dialogue, both sides are willing to change. --Thich Nhat Hanh


You don't need to attend every argument you are invited to


Do not ask that your kids live up to your expectations.  Let your kids be who they are, and your expectations will be in breathless pursuit.


#36 Mark

Mark
  • Islander
  • 5,269 posts

Posted 19 February 2013 - 11:37 AM

View PostBklnScott, on 19 February 2013 - 08:22 AM, said:

Mark, as you say, everyone is free to forge a metaphysical path toward their own "truth" - but that assumes an adult ability to distinguish between various theories drawn from various traditions, religious and scientific/mathematical included, doesn't it?  And that gets back to the (fairly important) subject of the thread: what we teach our children, and what it means both for them as individuals and for us as a society.

If we teach children that the fossil record (and indeed evolution itself) is god's little joke on mankind, are we also teaching them to distrust and discount science and mathematics?  (I'm reminded of the Bob Jones University Astronomy textbook that denies cosmological distances, black holes, quasars, et al - Like the fossil record, these are god's little joke on mankind.)

What are the implications for the individual child so taught?  (Will anyone argue that Bob Jones turns out astronomers employable in the field of astronomy?)  And what are the implications on a macro level?  A whole generation of children brought up to distrust and discount science?

Mark: Teaching children that there are many theories about the creation of the Universe is doing nothing more than telling them the truth! If someone is teaching them that creation was only caused  through an omnipotent being, that is wrong. That's is  deception and brainwashing. However, to not teach them about the other theories is just as bad as sticking their heads in the sand so they don't learn about the real world we live in, and all the beliefs therein.

Mikoto, why shouldn't we teach the theory of creationism in schools? What difference does it make where theories originate? What if one day we learn there IS a God...and everything we know in existence originated because of him? I shouldn't have to tell you that MANY myths are based on factual information. The writers of the Bible undoubtedly know all the things they wrote happened for certain, but they used the stories that had been passed from generation to generation for eons and attempted to write it to the best of their limited abilities and with their limited knowledge. For instance...did a global flood as described in the Bible once happen? Scientists have discovered the Earth has flooded and had higher sea levels in the distant past. Scientists have also discovered that the story of Noah was undoubtedly an account of Gilgamesh, which had happened further back than Noah. Both stories have undeniable parallels, and scientists have listened to those stories, and began to study if a flood of the proportion described in those two stories was a real event. They're certain a flood happened that affected thousands of people, but we also know the Earth didn't flood completely all over, and it didn't rain for 40 days and 40 nights. All that was writer embellishment. Journalists have been using sensationalism for thousands of years!

...And Scott, why would the fossil record be god's little joke on mankind? To me, the fossil record lets us know that there is more knowledge out there than just what is learned from ONE source (like the Bible). Explaining a few of the main theories of our creation was the way I was taught as a child, and I didn't ever distrust or discount science. My teacher told me the leading scientific theories, and when someone in the class said, "I thought God created the Universe"...she simply said, "Yes, that is what a lot of people believe."
To me...the fossil record, evolution, and the science behind the Big Bang totally mesh with my other beliefs that originate from the account I learned in the Bible. The Bible didn't say HOW God created the Universe. I also never believed the Bible had it's account of the creation of the universe and life, completely correct down to the last little detail. The Bible was written by men...and as we know, men often have ulterior motives, and/or wrong information when they're writing a book.

I was taught to take all the theories, and believe what I chose to believe, because as I said earlier...NOBODY knows exactly how and why the Universe came to be, and how and why lifeforms were created. God could have created the Universe via the Big Bang, and made certain the seeds of life were planted and would evolve as planned. OR, we could ALL be wrong with every current theory (religiously-related or not).

Scientists are still figuring out when and how early mankind spread around the world. It was once taught that people left Africa traveling east, until they reached what is now the Bering Strait...then they crossed over the frozen sea into North America. HOWEVER, now scientists are rethinking that theory, as much evidence has come to light that man could have been in North America MUCH earlier than previously thought. We now know Christopher Columbus was not, and never was the discoverer of North America. The Vikings beat him by several hundred years, and again, new things are being examined that may indicate that mankind was here in some capacity even before the Vikings found "Vineland".

Edited by Mark, 19 February 2013 - 11:40 AM.

Mark
Discussion is an exchange of knowledge: argument is an exchange of ignorance.
Peace is not the absence of conflict, but the ability to cope with it.
APOGEE MESSAGE BOARD

#37 Nonny

Nonny

    Scourge of Pretentious Bad Latin

  • Islander
  • 31,142 posts

Posted 19 February 2013 - 11:51 AM

View PostTricia, on 19 February 2013 - 10:30 AM, said:

You would hope that the children get ALL the information available. Whether it is from school or their parents or additional sources.  In my case I learned that there was more to the world and things I had been taught in church and school....because I read books!  and now we have the Internet.  Too many sources to gain knowledge.  (wheterh one belives the info or not...that's a whole other thing)

In my crappy Catholic school back in the early 60s we sure didn't get more information than the nuns and priests wanted us to have.  In fact, my interest in evolution began the Sunday a priest howled from the pulpit at us that evolution wasn't true and we were not allowed to read about it.  I was old enough by then to be going to public school and to have noticed what a bad deal Catholicism was for women and girls.

Anyway, the one good thing about the 25 years out of date science books, one for every five students, was that we rarely had to take them off the dusty shelves and experience the state of elementary school science education as it was before WWII.  But we sure got a load of theology masquerading as fact.

Yes, narrowing the education field for small children is abuse, especially if you saddle them with brimstone and hellfire if they dare to so much as consider expanding their knowledge.

Edited by Nonny, 19 February 2013 - 11:52 AM.

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

#38 Chakoteya

Chakoteya

    Playing Devil's Advocate

  • Islander
  • 3,035 posts

Posted 19 February 2013 - 12:32 PM

I don't see anything in the teachings of Jesus as recorded in the New Testament pertaining to the age of the planet, or anything else to do with the physical sciences. He was about interpersonal relationships, mostly, with the occasional alleged miracle.

Some sects really need to get over themselves and this religion versus science nonsense.
Andromeda, Star Trek (all shows) and Doctor Who franchise episode transcripts.


Just because I didn't post a reply doesn't mean I wasn't tempted to.

#39 Balthamos

Balthamos

    Once more unto the breach!

  • Islander
  • 2,280 posts

Posted 19 February 2013 - 01:03 PM

*
POPULAR

Teaching creationism in place of science is called lying. Teaching creationism as a religious viewpoint is called education. There is nothing wrong with teaching children about different religious theories. Dressing it up as an evidence based investigation is also lying. Teaching children to ignore the evidence because "god planted it there" is the opposite of science and therefore should not be in a science class.

If you want to teach different PoVs on the creation of the universe in one class room then pick a class room and teach the science parts as science and the religious views as religion. Explain as honestly as possible where each viewpoint comes from and let children make an informed decision or discuss it with someone they trust.

#40 Tricia

Tricia

    To err on the side of kindness is seldom an error.

  • Islander
  • 10,245 posts

Posted 19 February 2013 - 01:05 PM

^^^Which is exactly what my teachers did and my childrens teachers as well as myself do now. Whoever taught that God planted evidence as a joke...well, that's just stupid (and nothing I had ever heard before unless it was so stupid that i rolleyed my eyes and forgot it)

View PostNonny, on 19 February 2013 - 11:51 AM, said:

View PostTricia, on 19 February 2013 - 10:30 AM, said:

You would hope that the children get ALL the information available. Whether it is from school or their parents or additional sources.  In my case I learned that there was more to the world and things I had been taught in church and school....because I read books!  and now we have the Internet.  Too many sources to gain knowledge.  (wheterh one belives the info or not...that's a whole other thing)

In my crappy Catholic school back in the early 60s we sure didn't get more information than the nuns and priests wanted us to have.  In fact, my interest in evolution began the Sunday a priest howled from the pulpit at us that evolution wasn't true and we were not allowed to read about it.  I was old enough by then to be going to public school and to have noticed what a bad deal Catholicism was for women and girls.

Anyway, the one good thing about the 25 years out of date science books, one for every five students, was that we rarely had to take them off the dusty shelves and experience the state of elementary school science education as it was before WWII.  But we sure got a load of theology masquerading as fact.

Yes, narrowing the education field for small children is abuse, especially if you saddle them with brimstone and hellfire if they dare to so much as consider expanding their knowledge.

Which was always IMHO the best way to make sure a curious child sought out that info.  :)

The best way to always make a child want something, want to learn about something is to forbid it....and in my case as a child being told that it would send me straight to hell.  Maybe I was a a rare and contrary child though. :unsure:


(or maybe in my truly abusive upbringing it was the thrill of getting away with gaining that knowledge because my parents could not keep up with my reading. Eternal brimstone and hellfire was a far off and abstract idea to me as a child. father's fists and belt and rage much more real,  and telling me that I was forbidden any knowledge was a challenge to be taken and a thrill because I got away with it)

Edited by Tricia, 19 February 2013 - 01:10 PM.

In true dialogue, both sides are willing to change. --Thich Nhat Hanh


You don't need to attend every argument you are invited to


Do not ask that your kids live up to your expectations.  Let your kids be who they are, and your expectations will be in breathless pursuit.




Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Creationism, science

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users