You are all saying that " THIS is how it is...this is how you have to think "

Robots... ;)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

You are all saying that " THIS is how it is...this is how you have to think "

Robots... ;)

Yep. The Public School system has been turning them out for years now.

---

Air Cold, the blade stops;
from silent stone,
Death is preordained

Calm Chaos Forums : Everyone Welcome

You are all saying that " THIS is how it is...this is how you have to think "

Robots... ;)

Yep. The Public School system has been turning them out for years now.

you have given the opportunity to learn to read and write, then you have access to library for free, where you can find anything about any subject from different point of wiews, that is enough, if you decide not to use your brains
, it is your loss, but in school they should only teach facts, not "theory" like id, which is hardly even theory.

Interesting comments... I especially enjoyed this one:

If the pius few dissagree with science then all that science has produced should be taken away from them. Go sit in a cave without any man made scientific advances and when you are cold and hungry then you should just die because that would be less pain than what you cause to the rest of the world.

Can't we all just get along? ;)

(BTW - Is this 'theory of evolution' specific, or does this also apply to those of us who disagree with Pluto being demoted? hmm)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

where did you find them, i was again one day of, and when i looked the boards today, i found six banished id, has things been heated up.
id is only good in passport, it don´t belong to classroom,
you can teach religion in schools in finland but you don´t have to go to the classes and they have to present like all major religions, not just one,
and atheism too.

where did you find them

The comments are below the article... and this was *my* synopsis:

From a scientific perspective, I see no difference between Intelligent Design and Darwinism...

Other than the obvious, 'designer' or 'no designer'... but isn't that how the 'scientific method' is supposed to work?

The whole debate is nothing more than another fanatical religious battle between the God fearing and the godless...

And as usual, the proof is found in the demeanor, because the arguments themselves make no sense... ;)

(From a religious perspective, I think the devils best effort at disproving God has been challenged, and he ain't very happy 'bout that.)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

evolution, what would be the reason to have dinosaur´s roaming here to some 160 000 000 years, and then wipe them out, so only birds are left, i would like to have DINO as a pet

Not sure if I'm reading this right, the question is better posed to ID as evolution is a process that acts on what's available, it does not control stellar events (and it's likely that the dinosaurs were wiped out by a collision with a meteor). The "Designer", however, probably would have such control. Were the dinos an experiment gone bad? Did the designer get bored? ID leads inevitably to such questions, evolution does not. These questions, and several others cannot be answered by scientific enquiry (hypothesis, experiments and evidence, theory, etc), so what are they doing in a science class? ID in biology is as valid today as TARDIS engine design is in a physics class.

The dinosaurs evolved into birds. They are still very much with us.

---

Reality Internet Personality

So, basically what I am seeing here is an utter refusal to allow children to be shown different views of the same coin.

You are all saying that " THIS is how it is...this is how you have to think ", rather than let the high schoolers decide for themselves if they think that ID is as ridiculous as you all do. By the time they reach High School, most of those " impressionable " children are not as impressionable as you may think.

Not at all, I simply said the teaching of ID has no place in a biology class. It belongs in theology, alongside creationism, etc. ID is not science it is religion, teach it as such and I have no issue, dress it up as something it's not and then I have an issue. Our children have little enough time in school as it is, what's the point in taking time away from real science to explore theological ideas in a science class?

Uh huh. One problem with that line of thought. They aren't allowed to teach theology classes in public schools. That whole " separation of church and state " thing makes that impossible.

Think about this....

There are thousands upon thousands of research papers, books, videos etc that back up the scientific side of the argument. How many books are there that back up the Intelligent Design theory?? Basically, just one.

How much time could it possibly take to present the Intelligent Design side?? I would be exceptionally surprised if, even given permission to do so, teachers would spend much more than 1 period of class time discussing it.

You make it sound like they would be spending weeks " teaching " it. I simply don't think that is the way it would happen.

If people want intelligent design taught then let the Religious Education teachers teach it. I am totally against asking science teachers to teach something that is not science and not scientific. It does not belong in the science lab and i would always categorically refuse to teach it. I don't teach nonsense in my classes.

---

Reality Internet Personality

Just to poke in a semi-related story, that the father of modern genetics is supposed to be Gregor Mendel a priest and scientist who didn't have the internet, so he had so much time on his hands that he studied the mating rituals of peas.

---

"Living by the wisdom of computer science doesn't sound so bad after all. And unlike most advice, it's backed up by proofs." -- Algorithms to live by: The computer science of human decisions.

Just to poke in a semi-related story, that the father of modern genetics is supposed to be Gregor Mendel a priest and scientist who didn't have the internet, so he had so much time on his hands that he studied the mating rituals of peas.

An amusing take on it, but he was the father of modern genetics.

---

BOINC WIKI

So, basically what I am seeing here is an utter refusal to allow children to be shown different views of the same coin.

You are all saying that " THIS is how it is...this is how you have to think ", rather than let the high schoolers decide for themselves if they think that ID is as ridiculous as you all do. By the time they reach High School, most of those " impressionable " children are not as impressionable as you may think.

Not at all, I simply said the teaching of ID has no place in a biology class. It belongs in theology, alongside creationism, etc. ID is not science it is religion, teach it as such and I have no issue, dress it up as something it's not and then I have an issue. Our children have little enough time in school as it is, what's the point in taking time away from real science to explore theological ideas in a science class?

Uh huh. One problem with that line of thought. They aren't allowed to teach theology classes in public schools. That whole " separation of church and state " thing makes that impossible.

Think about this....

There are thousands upon thousands of research papers, books, videos etc that back up the scientific side of the argument. How many books are there that back up the Intelligent Design theory?? Basically, just one.

How much time could it possibly take to present the Intelligent Design side?? I would be exceptionally surprised if, even given permission to do so, teachers would spend much more than 1 period of class time discussing it.

You make it sound like they would be spending weeks " teaching " it. I simply don't think that is the way it would happen.

If people want intelligent design taught then let the Religious Education teachers teach it. I am totally against asking science teachers to teach something that is not science and not scientific. It does not belong in the science lab and i would always categorically refuse to teach it. I don't teach nonsense in my classes.

In Sunday school - in church where religious teaching belongs.

---

BOINC WIKI

Hard liners...

Make headbanging look like an Olympic event.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

In Sunday school - in church where religious teaching belongs.

Afraid someone might find order in the randomness? ;)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

In Sunday school - in church where religious teaching belongs.

Afraid someone might find order in the randomness? ;)

No. Creationism and ID are NOT science and do not belong in the science classroom. Teaching any particular religion has no place in the U.S. public school system.

---

BOINC WIKI

Methinks your dislike of religion is blinding you from flipping that scientific coin over... ;)

(Science does not belong in a Theology classroom, nor in Sunday school, nor in church. God's Word is the only textbook needed. THAT is religion.)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

I agree it should be in a separate classroom but to deny it to students in school leads to the continuation of the hate driven ignorance machine.

(...or is it the ignorance driven hate machine?)

IMO

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Methinks your dislike of religion is blinding you from flipping that scientific coin over... ;)

(Science does not belong in a Theology classroom, nor in Sunday school, nor in church. God's Word is the only textbook needed. THAT is religion.)

There's more to religion than monotheism.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

There's more to religion than monotheism.

God is gonna getcha for that! ;)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

evolution, what would be the reason to have dinosaur´s roaming here to some 160 000 000 years, and then wipe them out, so only birds are left, i would like to have DINO as a pet

Not sure if I'm reading this right, the question is better posed to ID as evolution is a process that acts on what's available, it does not control stellar events (and it's likely that the dinosaurs were wiped out by a collision with a meteor). The "Designer", however, probably would have such control. Were the dinos an experiment gone bad? Did the designer get bored? ID leads inevitably to such questions, evolution does not. These questions, and several others cannot be answered by scientific enquiry (hypothesis, experiments and evidence, theory, etc), so what are they doing in a science class? ID in biology is as valid today as TARDIS engine design is in a physics class.

The dinosaurs evolved into birds. They are still very much with us.

True, and crocs and 'gators, but many others became extinct without genetic descendents, so the point still stands. I guess I could've been more precise, would:
Does the KT Boundary mark a point where the Designer thought, "It's time for a radical change"?
be any better?

Please don't tell me TARDIS engine design is on the National Curriculum :-)

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

evolution, what would be the reason to have dinosaur´s roaming here to some 160 000 000 years, and then wipe them out, so only birds are left, i would like to have DINO as a pet

Not sure if I'm reading this right, the question is better posed to ID as evolution is a process that acts on what's available, it does not control stellar events (and it's likely that the dinosaurs were wiped out by a collision with a meteor). The "Designer", however, probably would have such control. Were the dinos an experiment gone bad? Did the designer get bored? ID leads inevitably to such questions, evolution does not. These questions, and several others cannot be answered by scientific enquiry (hypothesis, experiments and evidence, theory, etc), so what are they doing in a science class? ID in biology is as valid today as TARDIS engine design is in a physics class.

The dinosaurs evolved into birds. They are still very much with us.

True, and crocs and 'gators, but many others became extinct without genetic descendents, so the point still stands. I guess I could've been more precise, would:
Does the KT Boundary mark a point where the Designer thought, "It's time for a radical change"?
be any better?

Please don't tell me TARDIS engine design is on the National Curriculum :-)

No..but judging by our workload I think they just assume teachers have time travelling devices already.

---

Reality Internet Personality