Intelligent Design Vs Evolution

[Traveler]

Originally posted by LionHeart@Dec 10 2005, 08:23 PM

Traveler, I have another question about black holes. You said that a black hole is a singularity where all matter exists in on one form, including light and dark. So what about time? Is it existent or non-existent in a black hole?

←

According to the math and the theories - time is no longer a dimension (is not continuous) and therefore is not considered to exist other than a single point. If you understand the concept of dimension and a point then you can perhaps understand the meaning of singularity within a black hole.

It is thought that in entering a black hole everything is first reduced to two dimensions from three dimensions. Once within the black hole that then collapses to one dimension and thus the singularity. The question is what happen if something leaves a black hole - where in time would it be and could it therefore be placed at random in the time outside the black hole. This is unknown - personally I do not believe that randomness exist. It is an expression that comes from unknown parameters.

The Traveler

[Acez]

Intelligent Design Versus Evolution... to me both have alot of explaining and unknown voids that I think need to be answered. Evolution....Darwins and Mendel's theory, especially Darwin's, are just theories to me. Mendel's theory did seem acceptable with his theory on variation within specie but it seem to farfetched. Darwin's theory lacked the theory of variation of Mendel's but the theory of natural selection seems to random to happen and that this selection process was held on just luck and the survival of the fittest.

Intelligent Design is another "theory" which I think has its voids still to explain also. They seem to go hand in hand with Evolution. They both in result led to us....if thats what you think. Just the whole Genetic and Adaptation of our so called forefathers of the Apes that led to us through survival accidents seems to be farfetched... but thats my opinion...

[GRR8]

Originally posted by bizabra@Nov 12 2005, 10:38 AM

Mormonism is a cult.  See Merriam-Webster definition below:

 

  Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

cult

2 entries found for cult.

Main Entry: cult

Pronunciation: 'k&lt

Function: noun

Usage: often attributive

Etymology: French & Latin; French culte, from Latin cultus care, adoration, from colere to cultivate -- more at WHEEL

1 : formal religious veneration : WORSHIP

2 : a system of religious beliefs and ritual; also : its body of adherents

3 : a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious; also : its body of adherents

4 : a system for the cure of disease based on dogma set forth by its promulgator <health cults>

5 a : great devotion to a person, idea, object, movement, or work (as a film or book); especially : such devotion regarded as a literary or intellectual fad b : a usually small group of people characterized by such devotion

Creationism is a BELIEF about how the gods or god created the universe/world.  There are many different variations of creationism, you prefer the christian one be taught.  I say we need to teach ALL versions of creationism, EACH AND EVERY ONE, THEN let the students make up their minds.  I want them the learn the Hindu versions, all the various Native American versions, all the ideas of the Dogons, the Australian Aboriginies, ALL! 

Just keep it in the SOCIAL STUDIES portion of the curriculum and leave it the HECK out of the SCIENCE CLASSES!

←

But thats just a generalization. Creationism isnt the same concept as Intelligent Design. Intelligent design theory presents the possibility that a higher intelligence was somehow involved in the CREATIONS of the Universe. Stars, Galaxy Clusters, Gases, where Creationism is seen to be a believe in a GOD or GODS such as ALLAH, JEHOVA, YESHUA, of the worlds current major membership religions. Also, Cult is short for Culture, so every society, every REligios thought is a 'CULT' I believe that I.D (Intelligent Design theory) should not be EXCLUDED by the Federal Bench and that it should be included along with Evolution theory, (thats right, Evolution has not been decisively proven to be correct,) in our own blue marble world. They should both be presented as ideas, as neither one of them can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Either present them both, or Exclude the both.

[Snow]

Originally posted by Acez@Jan 5 2006, 12:52 AM

Intelligent Design Versus Evolution... to me both have alot of explaining and unknown voids that I think need to be answered. Evolution....Darwins and Mendel's theory, especially Darwin's, are just theories to me. Mendel's theory did seem acceptable with his theory on variation within specie but it seem to farfetched. Darwin's theory lacked the theory of variation of Mendel's but the theory of natural selection seems to random to happen and that this selection process was held on just luck and the survival of the fittest.

Intelligent Design is another "theory" which I think has its voids still to explain also. They seem to go hand in hand with Evolution. They both in result led to us....if thats what you think. Just the whole Genetic and Adaptation of our so called forefathers of the Apes that led to us through survival accidents seems to be farfetched... but thats my opinion...

←

The problem with that is that you equate theory (or one of the defeciencies of one) with the other and if they both have the same amount of factual basis.

In reality, evolution is a fairly mature and widely respected and accepted theory, peer reviewed, with evidence etc, etc whereas the theory of intelligent design has zero science behind it with no testable propositions. One is science the other religion.

[GRR8]

Whether evolution is widely accepted or not, doesnt make argument for the case of the Federal Judiciary making up the minds of the local school boards. They should stay out of the decisions on this matter. Secondly, evolution is widely accepted by whom? Name all the people you think you know who accept this theory as Science as you put it. I win. Case Closed. Hehe. :)

[Snow]

Because it is a constitutional issue (First Ammendment) Federal Courts have jurisdiction and thank heaven for that or the Podunk School District of Backward County Ark, would be teaching creationism (the correct name for intelligent design) and Martian architecture.

And, specific evolution is accepted by the the scientific community as a fact. The manner in which species evolve is still a theory - nevertheless it is a theory is accepted by the scientific community without much controversy. The only real controversy comes from those who argue from religion toward science.

[sgallan]

Whether evolution is widely accepted or not, doesnt make argument for the case of the Federal Judiciary making up the minds of the local school boards.They should stay out of the decisions on this matter.

This is one of those situations where they do have an obligation to rule against the school boards. It has something to do with that pesky document called the Constitution.

Secondly, evolution is widely accepted by whom? Name all the people you think you know who accept this theory as Science as you put it.

Hmm..... how about every single fully accredited College and University science curriculum in the United States of America for starters.... for starters.

I am guessing education was lacking?

[Traveler]

Originally posted by sgallan@Jan 8 2006, 08:37 PM

Whether evolution is widely accepted or not, doesnt make argument for the case of the Federal Judiciary making up the minds of the local school boards.They should stay out of the decisions on this matter.

This is one of those situations where they do have an obligation to rule against the school boards. It has something to do with that pesky document called the Constitution. 

Secondly, evolution is widely accepted by whom? Name all the people you think you know who accept this theory as Science as you put it.

Hmm..... how about every single fully accredited College and University science curriculum in the United States of America for starters.... for starters.

I am guessing education was lacking?

←

As much as I personally believe in evolution I must disagree with you and Snow on one issue. Education is a state right - not a Federal right under our Constitution. As far as a political issue I am in favor of a majority rule. In this case I do not believe the Federal has a trump card. I know that often the majority is wrong and stupid - I know - I know. But as wrong as a majority can be; the power in a minority has been worse.

As for the quality of education the more involvement the Federal Government has had the worse education has been. As of today education in the USA is the worse of all the industrialized nations. 10 years ago the USA produced the top engineers in the world now the top engineering schools are in Asia and the top engineers in schools in the USA are Asian because American schools produce an inferior product.

I know in some places they will teach Creationism in some form and produce scientist qualified to bring back the dark ages but at least a community that is interested in educating real science instead of junk science teaching man made global warming or freon destroying the ozone can have a chance. Education should not be politics but I am sorry that it is.

The Traveler

[Snow]

Originally posted by Traveler@Jan 8 2006, 08:46 PM

As much as I personally believe in evolution I must disagree with you and Snow on one issue.  Education is a state right - not a Federal right under our Constitution.  As far as a political issue I am in favor of a majority rule.  In this case I do not believe the Federal has a trump card. The Traveler

←

Traveler,

In this case it is not framed as purely a matter of education. It is framed as a First Ammendment issue and if the Govt. (schools) is teaching religion (creationism) Church and State are not seperated.

[sgallan]

As for the quality of education the more involvement the Federal Government has had the worse education has been. As of today education in the USA is the worse of all the industrialized nations. 10 years ago the USA produced the top engineers in the world now the top engineering schools are in Asia and the top engineers in schools in the USA are Asian because American schools produce an inferior product.

Only primary education. Our secondary education is still the best in the world. And it is our secondary education that won't put up with mythology in it's science programs. You'd lose your accredation.

As far as test scores..... are those actually better educated (probably in many cases). Or just better test takers (for sure). I home school now partly because I think this country is more interested on delevoping good test takers then good and life long learners.

[allen]

I've written several essays about conflicts between science and religion. One of the essays gives a way that evolution and the Fall of Adam can be reconciled. That essay can be downloaded from

http://www.leigh.org/sciencereligion/Evolution-Fall.pdf

for those who might be interested in reading it.

[Traveler]

I've written several essays about conflicts between science and religion. One of the essays gives a way that evolution and the Fall of Adam can be reconciled. That essay can be downloaded from

http://www.leigh.org/sciencereligion/Evolution-Fall.pdf

for those who might be interested in reading it.

I read you article and want to thank you and commend you for your effort. It is my impression that the article is written from a religious stand point rather than a scientific stand point. This is because it is written to support a belief structure rather than a method of experimentation to determine what can be verified.

I am concerned because there appear to me to be several references in the scripture account of creation and the fall that are highly symbolic rather than factual. For example, the “Tree of Life”. This concept is symbolic across many doctrines, not just in Christianity but through many ancient and modern religions (including the ancient worship of Baal - I point this out only to demonstrate the scope of the Garden Epoch even considering false teachings). In Hebrew even the term or name “Adam” is very symbolic. In essence a factual rendering may be an effort out of time an place, kind of like trying to prove there really was a “Good Samaritan”. The search for commonality (between symbolic and fact) may render the points given and taught in scripture to not be understood.

I believe you covered it in our observation that the scriptural account of Adam and the creation is likely to be missing some rather important facts. Science and evolution - on the other hand demand that facts be demonstrable and there is precious little in the Garden Epoch that is demonstrable.

The Traveler