This forum is the place for intellectual discussions, such as philosophical or scientific debates. There are some guidelines that apply specifically to posts in this forum, of which you will be expected to have made yourself aware before participating. They are as follows:
Intellectually stimulating topics only. If you can't have a deep discussion about something, it does not belong here.
If you're going to post, have something to say. When you make a new thread, write the initial post in a way that provides an introduction to the topic and invites further discussion. You could tell us how you feel and why, but always aim for constructive responses that further a discussion about the ideas involved, rather than a simple list of people's views. (Instead of asking "Are you a vegetarian?", discuss some of the arguments involved.) This guideline likewise applies for responses to topics.
Write using good English. That means full sentences with proper capitalisation, punctuation, spelling and grammar. No one is perfect, though; this is not an invitation to criticise others for minor mistakes.
Be nice. This is a forum for rational discourse, not flame wars. No one is always right. Be respectful of other people's views and accept that we are all entitled to our own.
These guidelines will be enforced by the moderators based on their best judgement, and anyone who does not take them seriously will lose the privilege of posting here. Spammers will be banned from the entire forum.
So I watched the Miss USA evolution question the other day and it just made me ashamed of ditsy girls. But it got me thinking, what do you think about the topic of evolution? I personally am all for evolution, and it is fact in my opinion, but I'm just curious on other people's beliefes and why. Sorry if someone has already done this.
I think evolution explains creation in an effective, logical way. It has been proven by science. My view is that as such, it should be the method taught in schools to explain creation. I am not a huge fan of this "Young Earth" creation business that some religious scholars (and political pundits) have been pushing as of late, especially in the United States. I do believe that one can have religious convictions, and believe in evolution. I happen to be one of those people. In my personal opinion, the "six days" mentioned in many religious texts could be a metaphorical way of showing the different "phases" of creation, which could be thousands of years. In that sense, it would have served as a way of putting an abstract concept (creation) in terms that peoples of the day could easily grasp. That said, I do not advocate for ANY religious teaching in public schools. Science ought to be taught in science class.
To be entirely honest, I don't care much about how we got here, only that we are here. Why worry about whether or not Great great (Etc etc.) Grandad was an ape or whether we were created as humans? I'm just happy living a happy life and living a faithful life- I'll find out when I die.
That said, I do not advocate for ANY religious teaching in public schools. Science ought to be taught in science class.
Well if you teach religion in public schools that would also be a violation of First Amendment Rights, a legal reason not to teach creationism or intelligent design in schools!
That said, I do not advocate for ANY religious teaching in public schools. Science ought to be taught in science class.
Well if you teach religion in public schools that would also be a violation of First Amendment Rights, a legal reason not to teach creationism or intelligent design in schools!
It's only a First Amendment violation if the Feds make the mandate. If Texas wants to order it's schools to only teach Young Earth Creationism in Earth Science, they can do that as far as the U.S. constitution is concerned, because of then 10th amendement's reservation of not-enumerated powers to the states/people. I don't know if the Texas constitution would prohibit that though.
Still, evolution has been seen on almost all levels of life: microorganisms, simple celled organisms, complex organisms of various classes (fish, reptiles, mammals, etc.) I don't see how you can deny it, since the evidence for it is everywhere. MRSA anyone?
Evolution is a lie. It's obvious that the Lord created the world in 7 days and that the world is only 6,000 years ago. It says so in the Bible.
"Current theories on the creation of the Universe state that, if it was created at all and didn't just start, as it were, unofficially, it came into being between ten and twenty thousand million years ago. By the same token the earth itself is generally supposed to be about four and a half thousand million years old. These dates are incorrect. Medieval Jewish scholars put the date of the Creation at 3760 B.C. Greek Orthodox theologians put Creation as far back as 5508 B.C. These suggestions are also incorrect. Archbishop James Usher (1580-1656) published Annales Veteris et Novi Testamenti in 1654, which suggested that the Heaven and the Earth were created in 4004 B.C. One of his aides took the calculation further, and was able to announce triumphantly that the Earth was created on Sunday the 21th of October, 4004 B.C., at exactly 9:00 A.M., because God liked to get work done early in the morning while he was feeling fresh. This too was incorrect. By almost a quarter of an hour."
Terry Pratchett says it, therefore it's indisputable fact.
-->Fossils are a joke that the archaeologists haven't seen quite yet.
Joined: 21st December, 2007, 2:20 am Posts: 21763 Country:
Neph wrote:
It makes the most logical sense compared to all of the other "theories" out there.
Such theories aren't validated by whether they're common sensical though. In fact there are a lot of scientific explanations, like in evolution, that are counterintuitive. It's actually more common sensical to think that, say, intelligence requires an intelligent designer, but Darwin shows us that this is actually false. This goes for things we experience as well. It would "stand to reason" that we love chocolate because it's sweet, but we'd actually have that backwards. Our "sweet tooth" is an evolved sugar detector that gravitates us toward glucose because is high energy and it is in our best interest to consume it.
I think evolution explains creation in an effective, logical way. It has been proven by science. My view is that as such, it should be the method taught in schools to explain creation.
Not to nitpick, but evolution doesn't attempt to explain creation at all. That would be the job of theories revolving around abiogenesis. The Theory of Evolution uses the concept of biogenesis, and offers an explanation of how life progressed into the beings we see today.
Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot], HikaruNoAngel and 0 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
Posted: 28th July, 2011, 12:05 pm 
