Let's do teach creationism!

[kurious_kathy]

This isn't a "teacher," Kathy, this is a bald-faced liar. These aren't facts, Kathy, these are unbelievably cherry-picked, twisted, contorted and distorted rantings of the deluded and religio-power-hungry beasts called creationists.

How about we get real, kathy? Would you like to discuss these "facts?"

BTW, Kathy, welcome to my radar screen!

Even before coming to faith in Christ...I never bought into the theory of evolution. And Ken Ham is a scientist that knows his stuff. I think God is using his ministry to open many peoples eyes these days. It really is up to each individual to choose what they want to believe. I believe in creation!
And there are so many more new evidences that proove scripture is correct.
Here's another husband and wife team that have some great archeological finds. It's amazing to me...http://www.dianawaring.com/ancient-history/index.html Her newer study on Ancient Civilizations and the Bible is really interesting.

 

[logical muse]

Even before coming to faith in Christ...I never bought into the theory of evolution. And Ken Ham is a scientist that knows his stuff. I think God is using his ministry to open many peoples eyes these days. It really is up to each individual to choose what they want to believe. I believe in creation!
And there are so many more new evidences that proove scripture is correct.
Here's another husband and wife team that have some great archeological finds. It's amazing to me...http://www.dianawaring.com/ancient-history/index.html Her newer study on Ancient Civilizations and the Bible is really interesting.

(my bolding)

And there it is. Sure, believe what you want to believe, but understand that that's all it is: Your choice to stubbornly cling to a belief that cannot be and is not supported by any evidence.

You'll excuse us for not joining you.

 

[Antiquehunter]

It really is up to each individual to choose what they want to believe. I believe in creation!
QUOTE]

Welcome back, Kathy - it was getting boring here without you coming in to type in mindless drivel to spark conversation.

If you truly believe that it is up to an individual to choose what they want to believe, then why do people of your faith feel it necessary to attempt to change people's minds through evangelism? Likewise, why do you feel it necessary to use a nation's educational system to spread fallacy to those most vulnerable - children?

If your argument is that children need to be exposed to a variety of different theories and allow them to make up their minds, then don't forget the words of our holy prophet Bobby, and you better make sure FSM gets his airtime in addition to your god, countless creationist myths of a variety of tribal peoples and the facts.

An educational system should be designed to stimulate learning. Sunday school classes and parenting should be responsible for the indoctrination of people into religious beliefs (or preferably, non-belief).

Yarr...

 

[Ed]

One can believe what one wishes to. However, when one attempts to foster ignorance in my child there is a significant problem.

It is amazing that some people actually want to embrace ignorance as if it is good somehow.

Can anyone explain where we reach a point where something is declared "designed"? Do we ask the Pope?

 

[BillHoyt]

Can anyone explain where we reach a point where something is declared "designed"? Do we ask the Pope?

Ever see the man/woman test or the butt/elbow test where your ability to discern one from the other is tested? I wonder if such an internet test would be helpful in demonstrating a point about this?

 

[BillHoyt]

And Ken Ham is a scientist that knows his stuff.

Really? What is his degree in? If he knows his stuff, why does nearly every biologist on the planet completely and utterly disagree?

It really is up to each individual to choose what they want to believe. I believe in creation!

That is not how science works. You are free to choose what you believe, but at JREF your claims will be challenged. You must provide us foundation for your assertions.

And there are so many more new evidences that proove scripture is correct. Here's another husband and wife team that have some great archeological finds. It's amazing to me...http://www.dianawaring.com/ancient-history/index.html Her newer study on Ancient Civilizations and the Bible is really interesting.

The topic is creationism, kathy, ancient civilizations and scriptural references to same are a red herring.

 

[Ed]

Ever see the man/woman test or the butt/elbow test where your ability to discern one from the other is tested? I wonder if such an internet test would be helpful in demonstrating a point about this?

Well, it seems to me that the standard is that a person with some, undefined, credentials simply declares themselves stumped.

While I have a reasonably good understanding of Scientific Method, I must admit that I have a hard time speculating about what the ID Method is.

Beyond that, I have to wonder what the implications of this are. Is it that once something is declared "Designed" further inquery is blasphamous? If that isn't the case, then why even have ID? It seems to me that it a systematically defined paradigm for declaring intellectual dead ends.

I also raised the problem of medicine in this regard. If a practitioner is stumped is one doomed to suffer?

You see, the principle is not "can we explain it" but rather "intellectual difficulty=God".

BTW, you were going to look at my post in the thread on successful homeopathy trials in the Science section.

 

[Psiload]

Even before coming to faith in Christ...I never bought into the theory of evolution. And Ken Ham is a scientist that knows his stuff. I think God is using his ministry to open many peoples eyes these days. It really is up to each individual to choose what they want to believe. I believe in creation!
And there are so many more new evidences that proove scripture is correct.
Here's another husband and wife team that have some great archeological finds. It's amazing to me...http://www.dianawaring.com/ancient-history/index.html Her newer study on Ancient Civilizations and the Bible is really interesting.

Ken Ham is not a scientist. No scientist worthy of the title would ever make such a ridiculous statement as this:

"No apparent, perceived, or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the Scriptural record,"

Ken Ham

The man openly rejects any and all evidence which contradicts his preconceived notions. This is not science. This is the antithesis of sciene. Ken Ham conducts his "research" backwards, he begins with his answer and then he goes looking for questions which support his a priori beliefs while ignoring any evidence which doesn't support his foregone conclusions.

Ken Ham is a preacher, not a teacher.

 

[Ashles]

It really is up to each individual to choose what they want to believe.

Absolutely. A person can believe dogs have 8 legs if they want. It is their right to believe whatever they wish.

They would still be wrong though.

And teaching others their belief would be to give other people incorrect information. Which isn't really the purpose of school now is it?

 

[Ed]

Belief NEQ Truth

 

[Psiload]

It really is up to each individual to choose what they want to believe.
And there are so many more new evidences that proove scripture is correct.
Here's another husband and wife team that have some great archeological finds. It's amazing to me...http://www.dianawaring.com/ancient-history/index.html Her newer study on Ancient Civilizations and the Bible is really interesting.

The link you provided is a perfect example of people who Do Not get the luxury of deciding what they want to believe.

That website provides pseudohistorical, and pseudoarchaeological curriculum for Christian homeschooling. These children aren't given "the facts" and left to form their beliefs as they wish. These children are sequestered and hand-fed the narrow-minded dogma of Christian fundamentalism.

The fallacy and disingenuousness of your Christian fundamentalist brand of "free will" is stomach-churningly obvious.

Barf.

 

[Kaydens]

Evolution versus Creationism is one of my all time favourite bugbears. The duplicitous phoney arguments for Creationism wind me up so much that I'm always ready to jump right in. Unfortunately some people just do not understand the point that Creationism, whether true or not, is not science.

I have to say that I found the best analogy for this problem in the words of Dave Gorman, from his googlewhack adventure. Referring to trying to teach Dr Duane T Gish (yes that Dr Gish) how to googlewhack, he said the following (or near as dammit): "Imagine phoning your grandmother and trying to teach her, over the phone, how to program a video player. Only you know she doesn't have a video player, but she does have a cake."

For me that just sums up the difficulty of getting concepts like the unscientific nature of ID/Creationism or the actual explanation for some of their evolutionary "puzzles" through to these people.

 

[wastepanel]

The big problem in teaching the science and the "theory" is that some creationists agree with evolution. A creationist believes the universe was created by God. That is the only statement that can be made about all creationists. There are thousands of Christian theories of creationism, and thousands more for any other religion. Until we find out what happened to create the first atom, there will be religion.

I would like to just reiterate my point from before. There are too many creationism theories to teach. If it were taught, what theory would be taught? The one agreeing with science, the one based on Genesis, or the Spaghetti Monster theory?

Kathy has every right to believe God exists and created everything. However, evidence should also be taken into account as it becomes available. I believe in God, but I also believe in science.