On Sun, 04 Oct 2009 16:20:19 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sun, 4 Oct 2009 12:46:12 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

That's one reason why evolution is taught and maintained over
creationism in public schools.

Evolution is science, subject to the usual standards of evidence,
experimental proof and peer review.

Creationism is a faith based belief system that can neither be proved
or disproved, just like any other faith based belief.

Why should public school students be subjected to the faith based
beliefs of others?

Why should students not be told of the beliefs of others?

None of the famous scientists have explained why only one species has
the ability to reason. Please don't compare porpoises to man.

And, you of all people should not be getting into these discussions!

Are we going to see 'WayneRant' next?
--
John H

All decisions, even those of liberals, are the result of binary thinking.

On Sun, 04 Oct 2009 17:36:03 -0400, JohnRant
wrote:

Why should public school students be subjected to the faith based
beliefs of others?

Why should students not be told of the beliefs of others?

That's fine if you're teaching a course on religion, not so fine if
you're teaching a course called science.

On Sun, 04 Oct 2009 23:09:17 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sun, 04 Oct 2009 17:36:03 -0400, JohnRant
wrote:

Why should public school students be subjected to the faith based
beliefs of others?

Why should students not be told of the beliefs of others?

That's fine if you're teaching a course on religion, not so fine if
you're teaching a course called science.

There's nothing wrong with mentioning the controversy in a science
class.
--
John H

All decisions, even those of liberals, are the result of binary thinking.

On Oct 5, 5:57*am, JohnH wrote:
On Sun, 04 Oct 2009 23:09:17 -0400, Wayne.B

wrote:
On Sun, 04 Oct 2009 17:36:03 -0400, JohnRant
wrote:

Why should public school students be subjected to the faith based
beliefs of others?

Why should students not be told of the beliefs of others?

That's fine if you're teaching a course on religion, not so fine if
you're teaching a course called science.

There's nothing wrong with mentioning the controversy in a science
class.
--


there's no SCIENTIFIC controversy. the 'controversy' is EXCLUSIVELY
political and religious.

On 10/5/09 7:21 AM, wf3h wrote:
On Oct 5, 5:57 am, wrote:
On Sun, 04 Oct 2009 23:09:17 -0400, Wayne.B

wrote:
On Sun, 04 Oct 2009 17:36:03 -0400, JohnRant
wrote:

Why should public school students be subjected to the faith based
beliefs of others?

Why should students not be told of the beliefs of others?

That's fine if you're teaching a course on religion, not so fine if
you're teaching a course called science.

There's nothing wrong with mentioning the controversy in a science
class.
--


there's no SCIENTIFIC controversy. the 'controversy' is EXCLUSIVELY
political and religious.


Precisely. There is no scientific basis or even theory for creationism.
There's nothing behind it but superstition and religious belief.
Creationism deserves no mention in modern science classes.

--
Birther-Deather-Tenther-Teabagger:
Idiots All

H the K wrote:
On 10/5/09 7:21 AM, wf3h wrote:
On Oct 5, 5:57 am, wrote:
On Sun, 04 Oct 2009 23:09:17 -0400, Wayne.B

wrote:
On Sun, 04 Oct 2009 17:36:03 -0400, JohnRant
wrote:

Why should public school students be subjected to the faith based
beliefs of others?

Why should students not be told of the beliefs of others?

That's fine if you're teaching a course on religion, not so fine if
you're teaching a course called science.

There's nothing wrong with mentioning the controversy in a science
class.
--


there's no SCIENTIFIC controversy. the 'controversy' is EXCLUSIVELY
political and religious.


Precisely. There is no scientific basis or even theory for creationism.
There's nothing behind it but superstition and religious belief.
Creationism deserves no mention in modern science classes.

It must drive krausie nuts to see "In God We Trust" on U.S. coins.

On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 05:57:35 -0400, JohnH
wrote:

On Sun, 04 Oct 2009 23:09:17 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sun, 04 Oct 2009 17:36:03 -0400, JohnRant
wrote:

Why should public school students be subjected to the faith based
beliefs of others?

Why should students not be told of the beliefs of others?

That's fine if you're teaching a course on religion, not so fine if
you're teaching a course called science.

There's nothing wrong with mentioning the controversy in a science
class.

We'll have to disagree on that. Once you accomodate the faith based
belief of your choice in science class, where do you stop? There are
quite a few different interpretations of the Book of Genesis, not to
mention all the other religions of the world. Science and the
scientific method are about provable facts. Everything else is
religion or philosophy.

On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 08:08:10 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 05:57:35 -0400, JohnH
wrote:

On Sun, 04 Oct 2009 23:09:17 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sun, 04 Oct 2009 17:36:03 -0400, JohnRant
wrote:

Why should public school students be subjected to the faith based
beliefs of others?

Why should students not be told of the beliefs of others?

That's fine if you're teaching a course on religion, not so fine if
you're teaching a course called science.

There's nothing wrong with mentioning the controversy in a science
class.

We'll have to disagree on that. Once you accomodate the faith based
belief of your choice in science class, where do you stop?

You can say that about anything. Mainstreaming special ed students
started off as just one period a day - now it's an entire school day.
Used to be band and drama were after school activities, then one
period a week, then every day.

Just sayin'. :)

There are quite a few different interpretations of the Book of Genesis,
not to mention all the other religions of the world.

Heh. You know it's funny - most religions, faiths, primitive pagans
and assorted heathens mostly agree - first there was nothing and then
there was something.

Now I grant you, the various reinterpretations of Genesis by flawed
humans promoting their own ideas presents conflicting/competing dogma,
but at the essential points, they are pretty much in agreement.

Well except for me that is - I still think it was Aliens. :)

If you take a literal interpretation of Genesis, it was caused by God.
But another way to interpret Genesis is with an eye towards evolution.
Try it sometime - it's a fun exercise.

Science and the scientific method are about provable facts.

True enough. Fairly obvious.

Everything else is religion or philosophy.

I agree - global warming, peak oil, wind/solar energy. :)

~~ now come one - you just knew that was coming :) ~~

On 10/5/09 8:48 AM, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 08:08:10 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 05:57:35 -0400,
wrote:

On Sun, 04 Oct 2009 23:09:17 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sun, 04 Oct 2009 17:36:03 -0400, JohnRant
wrote:

Why should public school students be subjected to the faith based
beliefs of others?

Why should students not be told of the beliefs of others?

That's fine if you're teaching a course on religion, not so fine if
you're teaching a course called science.

There's nothing wrong with mentioning the controversy in a science
class.

We'll have to disagree on that. Once you accomodate the faith based
belief of your choice in science class, where do you stop?

You can say that about anything. Mainstreaming special ed students
started off as just one period a day - now it's an entire school day.
Used to be band and drama were after school activities, then one
period a week, then every day.

Just sayin'. :)

There are quite a few different interpretations of the Book of Genesis,
not to mention all the other religions of the world.

Heh. You know it's funny - most religions, faiths, primitive pagans
and assorted heathens mostly agree - first there was nothing and then
there was something.

Now I grant you, the various reinterpretations of Genesis by flawed
humans promoting their own ideas presents conflicting/competing dogma,
but at the essential points, they are pretty much in agreement.

Well except for me that is - I still think it was Aliens. :)

If you take a literal interpretation of Genesis, it was caused by God.
But another way to interpret Genesis is with an eye towards evolution.
Try it sometime - it's a fun exercise.

Science and the scientific method are about provable facts.

True enough. Fairly obvious.

Everything else is religion or philosophy.

I agree - global warming, peak oil, wind/solar energy. :)

~~ now come one - you just knew that was coming :) ~~



The point was the relevance of creationism in science classes or,
indeed, in public schools. No relevance, should not be discussed except
perhaps as an example of religious superstition.

--
Birther-Deather-Tenther-Teabagger:
Idiots All

On Oct 5, 8:50*am, H the K wrote:
On 10/5/09 8:48 AM, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:



On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 08:08:10 -0400, Wayne.B
*wrote:

On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 05:57:35 -0400,
wrote:

On Sun, 04 Oct 2009 23:09:17 -0400, Wayne.B
*wrote:

On Sun, 04 Oct 2009 17:36:03 -0400, JohnRant
*wrote:

Why should public school students be subjected to the faith based
beliefs of others?

Why should students not be told of the beliefs of others?

That's fine if you're teaching a course on religion, not so fine if
you're teaching a course called science.

There's nothing wrong with mentioning the controversy in a science
class.

We'll have to disagree on that. * Once you accomodate the faith based
belief of your choice in science class, where do you stop?

You can say that about anything. *Mainstreaming special ed students
started off as just one period a day - now it's an entire school day.
Used to be band and drama were after school activities, then one
period a week, then every day.

Just sayin'. *:)

There are quite a few different interpretations of the Book of Genesis,
not to mention all the other religions of the world.

Heh. You know it's funny - most religions, faiths, primitive pagans
and assorted heathens mostly agree - first there was nothing and then
there was something.

Now I grant you, the various reinterpretations of Genesis by flawed
humans promoting their own ideas presents conflicting/competing dogma,
but at the essential points, they are pretty much in agreement.

Well except for me that is - I still think it was Aliens. *:)

If you take a literal interpretation of Genesis, it was caused by God.
But another way to interpret Genesis is with an eye towards evolution.
Try it sometime - it's a fun exercise.

Science and the scientific method are about provable facts.

True enough. Fairly obvious.

Everything else is religion or philosophy.

I agree - global warming, peak oil, wind/solar energy. *:)

~~ now come one - you just knew that was coming :) *~~

The point was the relevance of creationism in science classes or,
indeed, in public schools. No relevance, should not be discussed except
perhaps as an example of religious superstition.

--
Birther-Deather-Tenther-Teabagger:
Idiots All


There's many things that science can't explain, Harry.

I myself haven't seen anything in the Bible that would discount dyed-
in-the-wool, rock hard, chiseled-in-stone proof of scientific
anything.

however, I don't see science being the absolute authority on the
beginning of mankind, or beyond to before the Universes.

So, until science can present solid proof of origins of creation (big
bang theory included) I'll remain a Creationist that believes in
"Intelligent Design"

besides, even if you leave out the Judao-christian belief system, it
really does no harm to look at another point of view in school as an
option, because I never hear evolution as being called "fact" but I
hear it called "theory" a lot. And weather answerable, or unanswerable
questions, there's too many "what if's" with theory.