Louisiana Science Textbook

[BoyBlue_1985]

 

[Chris in London]

I am a huge fan of tolerance and letting others live their lives their way. I find some of the intolerance on this board displayed on the religion threads to those not sharing a particular point of view to be pretty nauseating. So I would not want to condemn Louisiana schools for teaching creation as a possible theory any more than than I would condemn schools in Saudi Arabia for teaching Islamic creationist thought.

But the idea that a person who grows up being taught this crap could one day be

(a) the most powerful man (or woman) on the planet, and
(b) the commander in chief of the most powerful military on the planet, and
(c) in possession of a locked briefcase with a big red button inside

is one I find utterly fucking frightening.

Creationism isn't a possible theory, it's a make-believe story which categorically can't be backed up with any scientific evidence whatsoever. People may as well be taught that the universe was created by Bob Carolgees using an Etch-A-Sketch if we're giving creationism any creedence.

That would be the sort of intolerance I had in mind. Good luck with explaining to the several billion adherents to one monotheistic religion or another that their most deeply held convictions are in fact bollocks.

 

[Carstairs]

I am a huge fan of tolerance and letting others live their lives their way. I find some of the intolerance on this board displayed on the religion threads to those not sharing a particular point of view to be pretty nauseating. So I would not want to condemn Louisiana schools for teaching creation as a possible theory any more than than I would condemn schools in Saudi Arabia for teaching Islamic creationist thought.

But the idea that a person who grows up being taught this crap could one day be

(a) the most powerful man (or woman) on the planet, and
(b) the commander in chief of the most powerful military on the planet, and
(c) in possession of a locked briefcase with a big red button inside

is one I find utterly fucking frightening.

Creationism isn't a possible theory, it's a make-believe story which categorically can't be backed up with any scientific evidence whatsoever. People may as well be taught that the universe was created by Bob Carolgees using an Etch-A-Sketch if we're giving creationism any creedence.

That would be the sort of intolerance I had in mind. Good luck with explaining to the several billion adherents to one monotheistic religion or another that their most deeply held convictions are in fact bollocks.

It may sound a bit intolerant Chris, but I'm with Matty here.

it's a make-believe story which categorically can't be backed up with any scientific evidence whatsoever.

What part of that sentence is causing you a problem?

It isn't an opinion, it is a straightforward fact.

 

[Matty]

I am a huge fan of tolerance and letting others live their lives their way. I find some of the intolerance on this board displayed on the religion threads to those not sharing a particular point of view to be pretty nauseating. So I would not want to condemn Louisiana schools for teaching creation as a possible theory any more than than I would condemn schools in Saudi Arabia for teaching Islamic creationist thought.

But the idea that a person who grows up being taught this crap could one day be

(a) the most powerful man (or woman) on the planet, and
(b) the commander in chief of the most powerful military on the planet, and
(c) in possession of a locked briefcase with a big red button inside

is one I find utterly fucking frightening.

Creationism isn't a possible theory, it's a make-believe story which categorically can't be backed up with any scientific evidence whatsoever. People may as well be taught that the universe was created by Bob Carolgees using an Etch-A-Sketch if we're giving creationism any creedence.

That would be the sort of intolerance I had in mind. Good luck with explaining to the several billion adherents to one monotheistic religion or another that their most deeply held convictions are in fact bollocks.

Science has PROVEN, via various dating techniques, that the Earth is millions of years old. Creationism states it is merely a few thousand years old. This isn't conjecture, it isn't guesswork, it's proven scientific fact. Just because there are people out there who choose to ignore this (and I'd question whether there are "billions" of people who believe the earth isn't as old as scientists believe, most religious people would accept that the bible's creation story, and indeed creationism in general, is hocum) doesn't chance the facts. Quite frankly if people want to stick their head in the sand and ignore the facts just because they contradict what they want to believe then I feel no compunction to humour them, or to consider their feelings when I point out how farcical and idiotic the whole creationism "theory" is. You may call this intolerant if you wish but why should I tolerate idiocy, just so I don't hurt people's feelings? What if a man on my street believes the World was created 4,000 years ago by an Alien overlord using a ray gun? Should I tolerate his views, to the point where they are added to a school's sylabus and taught as a potential truth? Of course not, he's wrong. Completely wrong. Demonstratively wrong. As wrong as those who believe in creationism.

 

[Chris in London]

Creationism isn't a possible theory, it's a make-believe story which categorically can't be backed up with any scientific evidence whatsoever. People may as well be taught that the universe was created by Bob Carolgees using an Etch-A-Sketch if we're giving creationism any creedence.

That would be the sort of intolerance I had in mind. Good luck with explaining to the several billion adherents to one monotheistic religion or another that their most deeply held convictions are in fact bollocks.

It may sound a bit intolerant Chris, but I'm with Matty here.

it's a make-believe story which categorically can't be backed up with any scientific evidence whatsoever.

What part of that sentence is causing you a problem?

It isn't an opinion, it is a straightforward fact.

The problem is with the bit that you missed out that said creationism isn't a possible theory

Unless and until you can rule it out unequivocally, it remains a possible theory, just as the possibility that we are all microbes in a dewdrop on the end of a giant's nose is a possible theory. the likelihood of it being true is another matter.

I tend to agree with you about the likelihood of the creationism theory being in fact true, but despite the fact that I am confident in my own beliefs I try not to allow myself to ridicule the deeply held beliefs of others. It's not about whether God created the earth in 6 days, it's about respect, and tolerance, and the lack thereof towards people who hold a different view.

And for that reason, I'm oot.

 

[TheBlueDune]

Scientific Principle:
1 make observation
2 develop hypothesis (idea on how what you observe may have come about)
3 experiment/test to see if your hypothesis may be true
4 conclusion as a result of the experiment or test
5 law setting a definitive explanation of the observation

Bible Bashers:
1 state the law (creationism)
2 look for evidence ( what previous Bible Bashers wrote)
3 invent explanation of the law and call it faith
4 decry all non-believers as heretics
5 explain scientific laws as a test of faith

Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition

 

[BlueHammer85]

Lol......Louisiana

The Earth is not a thousand years old mate I know that you know that, science knows that and God knows that

This is not taught within the Church of England or Mainline Christian thought

Stop cherry picking, do you want me to find a strange non religious science textbook that got it all wrong ?

It won't take me long ...

 

[Matty]

That would be the sort of intolerance I had in mind. Good luck with explaining to the several billion adherents to one monotheistic religion or another that their most deeply held convictions are in fact bollocks.

It may sound a bit intolerant Chris, but I'm with Matty here.

it's a make-believe story which categorically can't be backed up with any scientific evidence whatsoever.

What part of that sentence is causing you a problem?

It isn't an opinion, it is a straightforward fact.

The problem is with the bit that you missed out that said creationism isn't a possible theory

Unless and until you can rule it out unequivocally, it remains a possible theory, just as the possibility that we are all microbes in a dewdrop on the end of a giant's nose is a possible theory. the likelihood of it being true is another matter.

I tend to agree with you about the likelihood of the creationism theory being in fact true, but despite the fact that I am confident in my own beliefs I try not to allow myself to ridicule the deeply held beliefs of others. It's not about whether God created the earth in 6 days, it's about respect, and tolerance, and the lack thereof towards people who hold a different view.

And for that reason, I'm oot.

I'm sorry, maybe I wasn't clear. We CAN disprove or debunk almost all Creationist views.

Young Earth Creationism believes the Earth is less than 10,000 years old. Completely disproved by science.

Gap Creationism accepts the Earth is as old as scientists state (although they stand by a bizarre belief that a Noah type flood happened to reshape it), but doesn't accept evolution, they believe man and other biological life was created by God. Again, disproved by science.

Progressive Creationism, this is the same as Gap Creationism apart from not believeing in a global flood, and believing biological life stems from evolution (of sorts, there is no belief in a "common ancestor"), They still however believe God created man, based on, but not descended from, apes. Once again disporved by science.

Intelligent Design, the beliefs here vary but ultimately they believe that divine intervention is the reason for species development rather than natural selection/evolution. Its the whole "the eye is so complex it can't have developed naturally" debate. Essentially they have taken the main premise of evolution and science but added a "then God did something to make it better" step into the process. Harder to disprove as they've not really come up with a theory at all, they've more taken proven scientific theory but replaced certain evolutionary improvements/developments with "God did it". However, as Science, through imperical evidence, can demonstrate the various stages of human, and other biological, life and explain how these changes developed the "God did it" viewpoint is as good as discounted.

Theistic Evolution is the final viewpoint and is, basically, a cheat. They fully accept the entire scientific viewpoint, that man descended from apes, that biological life as we know it descended from one common ancestor, that the Earth and the Universe were created in the way scientists state. However they claim God actually created the circumstances by which all this could occur. God created the material universe and "cleverly" designed it in a way that it would evolve naturally. It's the theological version of having your cake and eating it and its as impossible to disprove as the existance of God (in as much as disporving the existance of something is impossible). The scientific argument against this is simply that there is so much natural evolution of the universe that it makes the need for a creator superfluous. Basically, if the universe is as able to evolve as it clearly is, why would a God be required at all. Dawkins take is a little more blunt, but no less relevant, in as much as he classes Theistic Evolution as "smuggling God in by the back door".

So, in the vast majority of cases, Creationsim can be scientifically disproven. The only instances where this becomes trickier are the ones where creationists have essentially taken the proven scientific elements of evolution and tagged God on superfluously. So, creationism isn't a possible theory. It's an attempt by religious people to either disregard scientific fact completely, or to obfuscate it by aligning it with God.

 

[Damocles]

That would be the sort of intolerance I had in mind. Good luck with explaining to the several billion adherents to one monotheistic religion or another that their most deeply held convictions are in fact bollocks.

It may sound a bit intolerant Chris, but I'm with Matty here.

it's a make-believe story which categorically can't be backed up with any scientific evidence whatsoever.

What part of that sentence is causing you a problem?

It isn't an opinion, it is a straightforward fact.

The problem is with the bit that you missed out that said creationism isn't a possible theory

Unless and until you can rule it out unequivocally, it remains a possible theory, just as the possibility that we are all microbes in a dewdrop on the end of a giant's nose is a possible theory. the likelihood of it being true is another matter.

Creationism has been unequivocally ruled out as a possible theory, by many different and separate disciplines. It doesn't match geology, chemistry, astrophysics, biology, or any other observations.

 

[Free Ian Brown]

Lol......Louisiana

The Earth is not a thousand years old mate I know that you know that, science knows that and God knows that

This is not taught within the Church of England or Mainline Christian thought

Stop cherry picking, do you want me to find a strange non religious science textbook that got it all wrong ?

It won't take me long ...

Good post