A solution to the creationism v. evolution debate

[Limasol]

Just to say, im not at all angry or deliberately vicious to anyone, just annoyed at myself more than anything for not being really clear and hence having to cover my tracks.

 

[Imitation Saccharin]

I don't remember saying that first thing but on the point regardless.

'pologizes~!

On the second point, finding a code in the bible is like finding a needle in a haystack made of needles.

Newton was looking for a secret code that would validate his....long story short he went the 16th century version of Grassy Knoll crazy.

Theres no need for religion in order to do this.

He wanted to validate his doctrine of Christianity which he'd kept hidden his whole life as it was heretical.

 

[Rolling Thunder]

Axia: Would you accept it's teaching as a part of religious education curriculae?

 

[Alex_P]

Morally, don't think it's okay to teach ID/creationism anywhere, including religious schools. That's because ID/creationism as they exist in the US aren't a bunch of philosophical beliefs about the unknowable or a set of reasonable criticisms about prevailing scientific theories -- they're pure bullshit based on a web of intentional fabrications. Morally, socially, culturally, these ideas are bad. Nobody in the ID movement -- not the Discovery Institute, not Dembski, not Behe, not Davis and Kenyon, and most certainly not Ben Stein -- wants to teach children to think critically. They want to teach children not to think. And that's unconscionable regardless of whether you're doing it in a public school, in a private religious institution, or at home.

This is why it's worthless to engage with cdesign proponentsists(*). You can't have an honest discussion with someone who is determined to avoid any kind of honesty at every turn.

Now, the people who just believe the lies of cdesign proponentsists... well, it is useful to try to engage with them. However, no amount of naked facts will sway them, no matter how incontrovertible they are. Neither will a philosophical discussion about why evolutionary biology or Big Bang theory or whatever might still permit the existence of God. Because what you're dealing with, fundamentally, is the systematic cultural acceptance of something that many know has to be a lie because it's considered a fundamental component of their entire worldview [http://slacktivist.typepad.com/slacktivist/2008/10/they-need-help.html]. And getting past that is fucking hard.

-- Alex

__________
* - If you're not familiar with the term, you can read about it here [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Of_pandas_and_people#Pandas_and_.22cdesign_proponentsists.22] or here [http://www2.ncseweb.org/wp/?p=80].

 

[Huey1000]

I think Bill Hicks should be mandatory viewing in schools and churches! It really doesn't matter whether there is a god or many gods or no gods; evolution is an incorporeal concept as well, yet it still exists and its evidence is all around us (maybe evolution is G-d). Just because some primitive bronze age tribesmen said there's an omniscient, omnipotent, extraterrestrial entity that looks like Ted Nugent with a beard and is deeply concerned with our sex lives, doesn't mean we have to believe it as well. FINAL POINT: I believe there is a great architect of the universe (and we are his/her workers and masons) who imbedded evolution into this universe in order for us to continue to grow physically, intellectually and spiritually on our own.