Utah Comes to Its Senses

Off Topic
41

[quote]ZEB wrote:
slimjim wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Evolution is a joke (way to many holes in the theory)…Not sure what they are trying to do with intelligent design, but I don’t like what I have heard…

Hey Zeb, I’d like to hear about the holes in the evolution theory.

No, actually you would like me to post what I feel are weak points regarding eveolution so that you can attempt to poke holes in them.

I would then refute your points one by one. After that you would attempt to point out where I’m wrong. Then I would correct you, and naturally you would disagree. Bla bla bla…

Don’t have the time or desire for Internet debates today. It’s Sunday man…family time. :)[/quote]

42

[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
hankr wrote:
IMHO, religion is a vestigial remnant of our savage and primitive past. As such, it may well be responsible for more death and sadness than any other idea ever formulated. I know this will piss of some other forum members, but honestly, I don’t care. I really can’t see any difference between a church service in a cathedral and native americans doing a rain dance. In fact, at least occasionally it would rain after a dance. This would give the indians more credibility.

Good post, hank. I think you might be coming down a little hard on the religious folks though. Sure, they are silly to people like us, but that’s just our own perspective coloring things for us. I would hesitate a bit myself before labelling religion as “vestigial”.

Yes, it is a remnant of our past which has interfered with a great many ideas, and has sometimes stood as a dividing line between our people, bringing violence and tyranny to many. But there has been a lot of good done in religion’s name as well. We cannot just look at religion as a bad thing.

It has unified people, and stood as a social construct which although heavily reliant upon ignorance of the masses, has still given some measure of civilization to us all. People like you and me have to realize that many people are not ready to accept the truth. They need their illusions, hank.

The premise of this whole thread was how ID was rejected by the Utah School Board. This was pleasantly surprising to me after we all heard about the Kansas School Board’s decision a while back about this same issue. The fact that this issue is debated AT ALL is proof that people aren’t ready to let go of the rock.

So would you still say that religion is “vestigial”? :)[/quote]

i look to two of the great philosophers of our time: Trey Parker and Matt Stone and their evil creation South Park. in South Park you’ll find them rip on religion and ideological bias like they hate it, then later in the episode or another episode they’ll rip on non-religionists’ bias.

i particularly like episodes like Cartmanland, Kenny Dies, Red Hot Catholic Love, and All About the Mormons because, in the end, they show the good that comes from religion despite their many, profound drawbacks while making religious adversaries’ reasons for disliking religion look retarded.

But then there’re episodes like Woodland Critter Christmas, Super Best Friends, Best Friends Forever, and Red Sleigh Down that make blasphemy fun.

43

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/39512

44

[quote]Gothic77 wrote:
I wish they’d quit teaching evolution, too.
[/quote]
Why would you not want the theory taught? You can’t “teach” it as a fact but there are too many coincidences to ignore evolution as a means to biological progression. This is one of the most important scientific undertakings in the history of scientific thought.

Just as in any science it is okay to teach things that aren’t completely understood if you approach them from the point of view of uncertainty–this means, that it is not taught as fact–only theory.

Utah is not as backwards as people might think–just don’t go to BYU and you’ll be fine :wink:

45

[quote]IL Cazzo wrote:
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/39512[/quote]

awesome!! The Onion. The only news yuo need to know!

“Anti-falling physicists have been theorizing for decades about the ‘electromagnetic force,’ the ‘weak nuclear force,’ the ‘strong nuclear force,’ and so-called ‘force of gravity,’” Burdett said. “And they tilt their findings toward trying to unite them into one force. But readers of the Bible have already known for millennia what this one, unified force is: His name is Jesus.”

46

I see absolutely no problem with teaching evolution to kids in biology class.

I do, however, have a problem if the teacher tries to throw a lesson in atheism in with the science…

47

[quote]Gothic77 wrote:
That is what I believe. I also believe the school needs to quit perpetuating what I believe to be a lie. Don’t discuss it at all or throw in both sides of it. But don’t make it all one-sided “this is how it is and that’s that!” That’s foolish.
[/quote]
Science is not taught this way. The problem lies at home. Children are taugh to believe everything they are told and therefore they loose their ability to question adults–and thus become robots as adults.

Evolution is a theory and can be taught as such–this means it is not taught as fact. Questioning any theory is not inherently wrong as long as one remains in the acedemic capacity when questioning it. Compare this to Sunday school where children are not taugh to question and then have this behavior reenforced at home when they question their parents about some “fact”. I’m sure you’ve never told your children, “because, I said so,” or “Becasue the bible says so.” There are many parents who take this approach. I beleive your fear of public schools teaching evolution is from the damage you’ve already done to your children by stifling their free thaught. They have already been brainwashed to accept everything they are taught and you are afraid they will become……free thinkers.

The next time your children ask you a question you can’t answer, I dare you to say, “I don’t know, lets find out together.” Or if they ask you a queston about an opinion you hold give them an honest answer why you hold that opinion–not because, “I was told it was true by my parents.”

48

[quote]Gothic77 wrote:
futuredave wrote:
God made everything in six days six thousand years ago! Geez. Why do people have to complicate everything?

That is what I believe. I also believe the school needs to quit perpetuating what I believe to be a lie. Don’t discuss it at all or throw in both sides of it. But don’t make it all one-sided “this is how it is and that’s that!” That’s foolish.
[/quote]

This is the problem with discussions like this - it’s all about what you “believe.” You believe evolution to be a lie but have stated no facts to support your belief. The level of math and science education in our country is crappy enough. To base our science curriculum on unsupported beliefs would be disastrous.

BTW - If you feel this way, then it should be your job as a parent to communicate this message to your kids. Believe it or not, parents have quite a bit of influence over their kids. When I learned about evolution, not once was it ever mentioned that evolution proved that there was no Supreme Being or that life began without the intervention of a Supreme Being. Most intelligent kids will realize that science teaches us about the Big Bang, but it can’t answer what existed before the Big Bang. The stupid kids probably won’t figure this out, but they probably won’t grow up to be scientists anyway, so it doesn’t really matter what the stupid kids think. I know that sounds politically incorrect and cynical, but that’s my view of reality. Some kids are smarter than others, and education needs to focus on maximizing the abilities of the smart kids.

49

DumDumDumDumDum

50

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
I see absolutely no problem with teaching evolution to kids in biology class.

I do, however, have a problem if the teacher tries to throw a lesson in atheism in with the science…[/quote]

Exactly. No matter how valid evolution is, it does not invalidate the possible existence of a higher power.

ID has no place being taught in science class.

It should be taught in social studies/history classes with other creation stories (myths) or not at all in public schools.

51

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
BostonBarrister wrote:
I see absolutely no problem with teaching evolution to kids in biology class.

I do, however, have a problem if the teacher tries to throw a lesson in atheism in with the science…

Exactly. No matter how valid evolution is, it does not invalidate the possible existence of a higher power.

ID has no place being taught in science class.

It should be taught in social studies/history classes with other creation stories (myths) or not at all in public schools.[/quote]

I thought there was a compromise solution to this but couldn’t figure one out. This may be it. Certainly, the role of religion in society is very important, and the evolution vs. creation debate has been an ongoing debate in our culture. I think the theory (or myth) of creation in the context of a social studies and/or history lesson on “culture wars” would be appropriate.

52

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Exactly. No matter how valid evolution is, it does not invalidate the possible existence of a higher power.[/quote]

Nor does it invalidate the possibility of Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny, Elves, etc.

It does not address anything based on “magical thinking”, so belief in higher, lower or lateral powers is not threatened in any way.

The only reason why evolution is singled out amongst all scientific theories is because is completely invalidates a literal reading of Genesis and The Flood. THAT is what rubs the credophiles the wrong way. Make all the theories you want, but don’t go showing their stories are made up.

53

[quote]pookie wrote:
THAT is what rubs the credophiles the wrong way. Make all the theories you want, but don’t go showing their stories are made up.
[/quote]

Or exaggerated a little bit.

I think that the tricky part about all of this is the fact that the christian mythology is reliant upon a certain degree of “unscientific-ness” to lend it credibility… which is weirdly counterintuitive, but true.

Remember it was the miracles which supposedly gave Jesus his following. It was proof of his divinity that he rose from the dead after three days of dirt-napping. All of this flies in the face of science and reason, so perhaps it is only right that science and christianity have traditionally been at odds.

54

[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
pookie wrote:
THAT is what rubs the credophiles the wrong way. Make all the theories you want, but don’t go showing their stories are made up.

Or exaggerated a little bit.

I think that the tricky part about all of this is the fact that the christian mythology is reliant upon a certain degree of “unscientific-ness” to lend it credibility… which is weirdly counterintuitive, but true.

Remember it was the miracles which supposedly gave Jesus his following. It was proof of his divinity that he rose from the dead after three days of dirt-napping. All of this flies in the face of science and reason, so perhaps it is only right that science and christianity have traditionally been at odds.[/quote]

It’s ironic but the more I learn about religious beliefs the less I tend to believe in a God - or at least the God that is portrayed by the religions. If you really good at the nature of God as presented in the Bible, this is a mean and arbitrary being. One bite of fruit from the wrong tree and ALL of humanity is condemned. Forget to say all the right prayers? Off to hell. However, the more I learn about science, the more I tend to believe that there IS actually a God. However, my view of this being is that it is a rational, logical being who does not interfere in human affairs.

55

[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:

It’s ironic but the more I learn about religious beliefs the less I tend to believe in a God- or at least the God that is portrayed by the religions.[/quote]

That’s because you are studying religion and not God!

Can the clay say to the maker “you are mean and arbitrary?” They sure can…on T-Nation …lol

No where does it say that in the Christian Bible…any version!

Eventually, “science” will catch up to the Bible…Think about how good “science” was in 1899. They thought they had all the answers then as well…Then all of a sudden almost everything changed. Don’t get me wrong, Science is a great thing. However, I never look for religion in science. And I never looked for science in religion.

There are some who have those thoughts. According to the Christian Bible (every version) that is not the case.

56

[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
lothario1132 wrote:
pookie wrote:
THAT is what rubs the credophiles the wrong way. Make all the theories you want, but don’t go showing their stories are made up.

Or exaggerated a little bit.

I think that the tricky part about all of this is the fact that the christian mythology is reliant upon a certain degree of “unscientific-ness” to lend it credibility… which is weirdly counterintuitive, but true.

Remember it was the miracles which supposedly gave Jesus his following. It was proof of his divinity that he rose from the dead after three days of dirt-napping. All of this flies in the face of science and reason, so perhaps it is only right that science and christianity have traditionally been at odds.

It’s ironic but the more I learn about religious beliefs the less I tend to believe in a God - or at least the God that is portrayed by the religions. If you really good at the nature of God as presented in the Bible, this is a mean and arbitrary being. One bite of fruit from the wrong tree and ALL of humanity is condemned. Forget to say all the right prayers? Off to hell. However, the more I learn about science, the more I tend to believe that there IS actually a God. However, my view of this being is that it is a rational, logical being who does not interfere in human affairs.[/quote]

I agree. Most religous stuff is full of crap. I don’t believe in what they are selling.

The more I learn about the fantastic theories of the origins of the universe and the evolution of life, the more I think there is something we are missing. The theories appear to be valid as far as they go, but they do not explain the why only the how.

If there isn’t a god, I understand why we create him.

57

[quote]pookie wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Exactly. No matter how valid evolution is, it does not invalidate the possible existence of a higher power.

Nor does it invalidate the possibility of Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny, Elves, etc.

…[quote]

I appreciate the sarcasm, but science and history certainly do disprove or explain all of these things.

The question of a higher power cannot be proven or disproven by man.

It is hardly possible to have an intelligent discussion on the matter.

58

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Eventually, “science” will catch up to the Bible…Think about how good “science” was in 1899. They thought they had all the answers then as well…[/quote]
They thought that they wouldn’t learn very much more… it’s not that they thought they had all the answers!

As we can all see, they were quite wrong. Just like any scientist today saying that they’ve got it ALL figured out. Remember that saying… the more you know, the more you realize you don’t know? Think of how “ignorant” we will be in fifty years! :slight_smile:

I don’t know what you meant by science catching up to the bible, but oh well.

59

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
pookie wrote:
I appreciate the sarcasm, but science and history certainly do disprove or explain all of these things.[/quote]

Really? Show me scientific proof that elves do not exist.

It is extremely difficult to actually prove anything, except in mathematics. It is more pragmatic to go by an “index of certitude.” For example, we’ve got a very high “index of certitude” that the sun will come up tomorrow; in fact, most people would probably bet their life on it. If the proposition was “The Bush administration has the best interests of the American public at heart,” the “index of certitude” would go down. It would vary by person, of course, but I don’t think any rational person could say that both propositions (the sun coming up and the Bush administration being altruistic) have the same degree of certitude.

So, if the proposition is “God exists” what is the index of certitude? Believers will of course claim 100% certainty, but that does not really help as they operate from faith and not reason.

Rationally, we could consider other cultures, past and present, and ask what index of certitude we’d assign to their god or gods.

Now, any Christian will probably assign a low degree of certitude to the existence of Vishnu, Brahma or Shiva. A similar low degree of certainty for Anubis, Osiris, Seth and Isis. In fact, for any god or gods, except the One in which they believe, they’ll assign a very low index of certainty for the existence of those beings, probably dismissing entirely the possibility of those entities’ existence. But of course, you can’t disprove the existence of Zeus or Wotan any more than you can disprove God.

I think it is simply logical to apply the same low index of certitude for the existence of the christian God.

So, while disproving the existence of God is impossible, it is not irrational to think there isn’t one. Even if there is one, it is still rational to believe that no human religion, past or present, has any idea, other than man-made ones, about the nature of God. Any talk about sin, commandments, the afterlife, etc. can reasonably be equated to any other human mythology. This is not to say to no commandments are morally valid, or that their aren’t good lessons to be found in scripture. What this says is that the degree of certitude that all of it is man’s invention is higher than the the index of certitude for “It is God’s will revealed.”

Not if you only address the sarcasm and ignore the rest of the argument…

60

[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Eventually, “science” will catch up to the Bible…Think about how good “science” was in 1899. They thought they had all the answers then as well…
They thought that they wouldn’t learn very much more… it’s not that they thought they had all the answers!

As we can all see, they were quite wrong. Just like any scientist today saying that they’ve got it ALL figured out. Remember that saying… the more you know, the more you realize you don’t know? Think of how “ignorant” we will be in fifty years! :slight_smile:

I don’t know what you meant by science catching up to the bible, but oh well.[/quote]

How you been lothario?

I think it’s sort of funny that some rely so heavily on science. Remember a few years ago when the “experts” figured out how everyone could lose weight and stay healthy? It’s simple, just avoid fat in your diet!

They had a tremendous amount of studies to back it up. “Can’t argue with us we have the latest science behind us.”

I know, I’m just a tad off topic here. I’m sorry, it’s just that whenever I read of people worshipping at the alter of science (not you lothario) I get a huge belly laugh!