Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #21   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,326
Default vatican astronomer blasts creationism

On Mon, 5 Oct 2009 04:20:21 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:

On Oct 4, 5:36*pm, JohnRant wrote:

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.


sure they have. check out the concept of 'spandrel' that stephen jay
gould and other developed...


Actually, I like his analogy to arched bridge spans. When you think
about it, his concept of architectural imperatives in evolution rather
than adaptive selection (the Darwinian model) make some sense in the
abstract.

However, to get bring this back to the original point, Gould also
believed that science and religious faith are two seperate concepts.
As Brother Consolmagno said - "If people have no other reason to
believe in God than that they can’t imagine how the human eye could
have evolved by itself, then their faith is very weak.” One can have
faith in a Creator and still believe in the science of evolution.

Or Aliens. :)
  #22   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,326
Default vatican astronomer blasts creationism

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 :) ~~
  #23   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
Jim Jim is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Sep 2009
Posts: 483
Default vatican astronomer blasts creationism

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.
  #24   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,764
Default vatican astronomer blasts creationism

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
  #26   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Sep 2009
Posts: 463
Default vatican astronomer blasts creationism

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? 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.


There's nothing wrong with disagreeing, and there's nothing wrong with
presenting the viewpoint of many billions of people throughout the
world.
--
John H

All decisions, even those of liberals, are the result of binary thinking.
  #27   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Sep 2009
Posts: 463
Default vatican astronomer blasts creationism

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? 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.


BTW, I let you off easy. Science may attempt to prove facts. It has
not done so. Science has yet to show when, where, or how man came to
be, let alone with an ability to reason.
--
John H

All decisions, even those of liberals, are the result of binary thinking.
  #28   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 10,492
Default vatican astronomer blasts creationism

On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 13:38:48 -0400, JohnH
wrote:

There's nothing wrong with disagreeing, and there's nothing wrong with
presenting the viewpoint of many billions of people throughout the
world.


Science is not based on viewpoints and it is a mistake to get that
confused.

  #29   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,764
Default vatican astronomer blasts creationism

On 10/5/09 2:12 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 13:38:48 -0400,
wrote:

There's nothing wrong with disagreeing, and there's nothing wrong with
presenting the viewpoint of many billions of people throughout the
world.


Science is not based on viewpoints and it is a mistake to get that
confused.



I really don't understand this religious "viewpoint" nonsense being
presented in a public school science class or, in fact, any other class
but for one whose subject matter is "ethics."

Discussion of religious viewpoints belongs in houses of worship,
religious schools, and in the home, *not* in the K-12 public schools.


--
Birther-Deather-Tenther-Teabagger:
Idiots All
  #30   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 10,492
Default vatican astronomer blasts creationism

On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 13:41:54 -0400, JohnH
wrote:

BTW, I let you off easy. Science may attempt to prove facts. It has
not done so. Science has yet to show when, where, or how man came to
be, let alone with an ability to reason.


The science of evolution deals with all living organisms not just man.
It is interesting to note that even with all of our advanced science
no one has yet synthetically produced even the simplest one cell
living organism. That may change but it just shows how difficult it
is.

It is pretty clear that mankind has evolved over the years, up from
the relatively recent cro-magnons and others to the present day. Where
the cro-magnons and other early human forms came from may never be
precisely known since it happened over hundreds of thousands of years.

It may turn out that the ability to reason is not limited to humans.
Our real unique specialty (in addition to complex reasoning) seems to
be the ability to manipulate symbols, record history, learn from it,
and pass it on to the next generation.

Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Right-wing newspaper slams cretinism, er, creationism museum H the K[_2_] General 20 August 20th 09 10:08 PM
GOP blasts GOP jps General 1 June 25th 09 09:40 PM
OT Creationism or evolution? Dixon General 1 January 25th 07 06:29 AM
(OT) Reagan blasts Bush Jim General 6 June 11th 04 07:24 PM
Billionaire Blasts Bush basskisser General 65 March 27th 04 10:39 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:15 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 BoatBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Boats"

 

Copyright © 2017