Intelligent Design Being Taught in Public School - Page 3

ChrisV1 · 05-25-2008, 11:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HipHopScribe

It is not the same as your point about exorcisms, because science has standards, science has set methods, and requires that results can be replicated. It's an unreasonable standard to expect that someone must have conducted all of the research leading up to the support of a theory, no one would ever be able to accomplish anything, and no progress would be made. If that was the standard, you'd be living in a cave somewhere worshiping a bear, instead of talking almost in real time with people thousands of miles away from you, because that is what the methods of science have made possible.

Which is why science is speculation, which make it the same as my Exorcist point. How do you know the Scientists are not just filling in facts or creating facts that may be true but are not proven? You don't. How do you know if someone that is possessed is really possessed? You don't. You are just taking someone's word for it. Have we seen an animal Evolve? No. Have we seen a half human, half primate? No. Most of that information that is 'plausible' and that is all. Which means it is all speculation. Evolution is an idea of could have happened according to some scientists research, that for all we know can be completely false.

Little Horn · 05-25-2008, 11:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChrisV1

Have we seen a half human, half primate? No.

Actually you may want to read about Oliver the Chimpanzee... I'm not saying it's irrefutable evidence, it's just interesting is all...

ChrisV1 · 05-25-2008, 11:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by floorpuncher

Actually you may want to read about Oliver the Chimpanzee... I'm not saying it's irrefutable evidence, it's just interesting is all...

Heh, he's kind of creepy honestly. Who knows, he could be a different species, Genetically mutated or something else. It's not like he talks or anything he just is a little different. Pretty Interesting. Lets get back on topic now.

HipHopScribe · 05-26-2008, 06:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChrisV1

Which is why science is speculation, which make it the same as my Exorcist point. How do you know the Scientists are not just filling in facts or creating facts that may be true but are not proven? You don't. How do you know if someone that is possessed is really possessed? You don't. You are just taking someone's word for it. Have we seen an animal Evolve? No. Have we seen a half human, half primate? No. Most of that information that is 'plausible' and that is all. Which means it is all speculation. Evolution is an idea of could have happened according to some scientists research, that for all we know can be completely false.

It's not the same as your exorcism point, there is data, there is verification by fellow scientists, there are repeatable results. A person can easily lie about possession, and keep telling that lie, but science requires repeated tests of a theory, so it is much much more trustworthy. Of course you can't know anything beyond a shadow of a doubt, other than that you exist, but there are degrees of confidence, it's completely impracticable to approach it as if you have to personally verify all of the results yourself, it's ridiculous, at some point you just have to be reasonable about what you accept. If you understand how science works, you realize the burden theories are placed under, and you recognize that it is not at all the same, that someone claiming to be possessed has much less to back them up.

Actually, we see evolution all around us, we've seen genetic variation in populations, we've seen adaptation and speciation
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html

Evolution is not all speculation, it's scientific theory based on years of factual evidence and experimentation with repeatable results.

ChrisV1 · 05-26-2008, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HipHopScribe

It's not the same as your exorcism point, there is data, there is verification by fellow scientists, there are repeatable results. A person can easily lie about possession, and keep telling that lie, but science requires repeated tests of a theory, so it is much much more trustworthy. Of course you can't know anything beyond a shadow of a doubt, other than that you exist, but there are degrees of confidence, it's completely impracticable to approach it as if you have to personally verify all of the results yourself, it's ridiculous, at some point you just have to be reasonable about what you accept. If you understand how science works, you realize the burden theories are placed under, and you recognize that it is not at all the same, that someone claiming to be possessed has much less to back them up.

Actually, we see evolution all around us, we've seen genetic variation in populations, we've seen adaptation and speciation
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html

The difference is, that there have been millions of possessions reported and documented on live film. Some times the victim would stay in the hospital for the rest of their life while doctors could not find what was wrong. There has been children 3 & under reported being possessed and then cured after Exorcism.

There has been millions of Clairvoyants and people that have claimed to see spirits.

TO ME that in itself is irrefutable evidence. Also, one of my own family members was possessed.

Sure it isn't concrete, but what is honestly. There could be the same amount of evidence for both theories but to me Religion is more believable and stable.

HipHopScribe · 05-26-2008, 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChrisV1

The difference is, that there have been millions of possessions reported and documented on live film. Some times the victim would stay in the hospital for the rest of their life while doctors could not find what was wrong. There has been children 3 & under reported being possessed and then cured after Exorcism.

There has been millions of Clairvoyants and people that have claimed to see spirits.

TO ME that in itself is irrefutable evidence. Also, one of my own family members was possessed.

Sure it isn't concrete, but what is honestly. There could be the same amount of evidence for both theories but to me Religion is more believable and stable.

Believe what you want, but don't try to claim that people who think they were possessed or saw spirits is objective evidence of any religious principles, it simply doesn't meet that burden. You think religion is more believable than science, so you believe it is irrefutable evidence, but that's not a reasonably logical conclusion.

Trogdor · 05-26-2008, 02:11 PM

On both sides of this debate I would like to first state, if you are going to debate your side effectively,
-No bashing
-Have Evidence, or a personal experience to show your angle better
-Have Counter-Points, not comments on how the other person is displaying stupidiy, if you do that I will believe that you have an actual mental retardation
-Don't expect being respected, especially on topics like this

Now here is my view on Intelligent Design vs Evolution in a school setting,

I go to a private christian high school, when my science teacher speaks about evolution he gives it reasons why it could or couldn't happen, when my religion class teacher speaks about it she only speaks about it's flaws and most is in articles she has grabbed from the internet and not even fully read. I would like public schools to have more teachers like my science teacher, he taught us around a chapter of evolution then a chapter of intelligent design and how the story of Noah's ark can be practically displayed through the history of the earth.

I have learned both sides and now I can comfortably say I believe in the intelligent design view.

A question for everyone who has read and posted in this thread, have you actually given thought to both sides?

ChrisV1 · 05-26-2008, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HipHopScribe

Believe what you want, but don't try to claim that people who think they were possessed or saw spirits is objective evidence of any religious principles, it simply doesn't meet that burden. You think religion is more believable than science, so you believe it is irrefutable evidence, but that's not a reasonably logical conclusion.

Agree to Disagree?

I have Experienced things religious that you probably not have, so any evidence I propose to you will be seen as ridiculous, and I can understand that. Until you experience these things you will never quite grasp Religion, that is all. Lets get back on topic about schools.

HipHopScribe · 05-26-2008, 03:29 PM

Yeah, we'll have to agree to disagree, we've diverged somewhat from the main topic.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trogdor

Now here is my view on Intelligent Design vs Evolution in a school setting,

I go to a private christian high school, when my science teacher speaks about evolution he gives it reasons why it could or couldn't happen, when my religion class teacher speaks about it she only speaks about it's flaws and most is in articles she has grabbed from the internet and not even fully read. I would like public schools to have more teachers like my science teacher, he taught us around a chapter of evolution then a chapter of intelligent design and how the story of Noah's ark can be practically displayed through the history of the earth.

For a private, religious school, your science teacher's lessons seem good, he presents both sides, the religious argument and the scientific argument. In a public school, however, your science teacher's lessons would not be acceptable, religion has no place in a public school science classroom, by law, and evolution is the scientifically accepted theory, while intelligent design is not a scientifically acceptable explanation for the scientific community (there is a small minority of scientists who argue for it, but they don't have the actual science on their side). Simply put, in the eyes of science, there aren't two sides, and in public schools those standards must be followed.

Quote:

A question for everyone who has read and posted in this thread, have you actually given thought to both sides?

Yep, I've read the creationist arguments, and I find they focus on probabilities and supposed weakness of the theory of evolution, rather than presenting evidence that supports their side. Even if I accepted their arguments for disproving the theory of evolution, that theory being incorrect would not mean that theirs is, but even their claims against evolution often come from misconceptions or are misleading.

Cloud Strife · 05-26-2008, 04:25 PM

This is a very interesting topic. I believe that Intelligent design being taught by science teachers should be stopped, and if you want it discussed then just make a religion class. I myself am a man of science, and the creation of the universe is still unknown, but a few theories still exist today.

For those who believe in religion, do not get upset over my post, I don't mean to offend anyone.

If you want Intelligent Design to be taught, make a Religion class, and keep it out of Science class.

Trogdor · 05-26-2008, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zombii Darren

If you want Intelligent Design to be taught, make a Religion class, and keep it out of Science class.

but by denying any intelligent design theory and only accepting one theory to teach as factual 100% proven information aren't we denying the freedom of speech and free thought that caused America to be?

mrminty · 05-26-2008, 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChrisV1

Which is why science is speculation, which make it the same as my Exorcist point. How do you know the Scientists are not just filling in facts or creating facts that may be true but are not proven? You don't. How do you know if someone that is possessed is really possessed? You don't. You are just taking someone's word for it. Have we seen an animal Evolve? No. Have we seen a half human, half primate? No. Most of that information that is 'plausible' and that is all. Which means it is all speculation. Evolution is an idea of could have happened according to some scientists research, that for all we know can be completely false.

Again, your real problem appears to be ignorance. There is no half man half primate, because man did not evolve from monkeys. Monkeys and man both evolved from the same ancestor, not from each other.

MasterSprtn117 · 05-26-2008, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gregory

Woah, that is horrible in my opinion and there should be a nationwide ban, and hefty consequences if anybody reports the teacher.

Separation from State and Church, totally a violation.

Isn't intelligent design just another theory on how the universe was created? Shouldn't they teach both and let the students decide what to believe in?

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrminty

Again, your real problem appears to be ignorance. There is no half man half primate, because man did not evolve from monkeys. Monkeys and man both evolved from the same ancestor, not from each other.

Then where is the link between man and that ancestor or monkeys and that ancestor?

HipHopScribe · 05-26-2008, 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MasterSprtn117

Isn't intelligent design just another theory on how the universe was created? Shouldn't they teach both and let the students decide what to believe in?

They shouldn't teach both in science classes, there is no basis for it to be on a the science curriculum. The students can of course decide what to believe, but intelligent design is for another forum of discussion, like a religious studies class, family dinner or church.

MasterSprtn117 · 05-26-2008, 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HipHopScribe

They shouldn't teach both in science classes, there is no basis for it to be on a the science curriculum. The students can of course decide what to believe, but intelligent design is for another forum of discussion, like a religious studies class, family dinner or church.

Where is the basis for evolution? There are no hard facts, just like with intelligent design. Both are theories.

HipHopScribe · 05-26-2008, 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MasterSprtn117

Where is the basis for evolution? There are no hard facts, just like with intelligent design. Both are theories.

That's not true, years of research and experimentation has gone into our current understanding of evolution, there are plenty of facts in support of evolution, analysis of fossils, DNA, speciation, and other research. It's true that both are theories, but only one is a scientific theory, which has stood up to years of rigorous scientific study.

EndUnknown · 05-26-2008, 08:23 PM

I firmly believe a world religion and philosophy class should be in ALL schools as a required class. I guarantee you it would be of more use in real life than Ancient European Geography.

Cloud Strife · 05-26-2008, 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HipHopScribe

They shouldn't teach both in science classes, there is no basis for it to be on a the science curriculum. The students can of course decide what to believe, but intelligent design is for another forum of discussion, like a religious studies class, family dinner or church.

Exactly my opinion, and Trogdor, I am not ignoring everything except one theory, just movie some others into another category that it should be in.

MasterSprtn117 · 05-26-2008, 08:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HipHopScribe

That's not true, years of research and experimentation has gone into our current understanding of evolution, there are plenty of facts in support of evolution, analysis of fossils, DNA, speciation, and other research. It's true that both are theories, but only one is a scientific theory, which has stood up to years of rigorous scientific study.

Years of research doesn't help evolution unless there's hard fact. What facts support evolution completely?

What about the groups of scientists that research intelligent design? They have their own scientific theories that support intelligent design.

05-26-2008, 04:25 PM	#50 (permalink)
Cloud Strife Windows 7 Tech Support Team GFX Crew Section Staff Elite Zuner Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Vancouver, BC Posts: 2,422 Reputation: 677	This is a very interesting topic. I believe that Intelligent design being taught by science teachers should be stopped, and if you want it discussed then just make a religion class. I myself am a man of science, and the creation of the universe is still unknown, but a few theories still exist today. For those who believe in religion, do not get upset over my post, I don't mean to offend anyone. If you want Intelligent Design to be taught, make a Religion class, and keep it out of Science class.

Advertisement