'Intelligent design' teaching ban 386 replies

Please wait...

LIGHTNING [NL]

FH2 Developer

50 XP

30th May 2003

0 Uploads

9,811 Posts

0 Threads

#21 15 years ago
Saquistbiology has nothing to do with evolution

That statement is insane. The evolutionary theory is the basis of modern biology.




Psychokenesis

I'm too cool to Post

136,505 XP

15th October 2003

0 Uploads

13,428 Posts

0 Threads

#22 15 years ago

biology is the study of living things not the evolution of living things or the evolution of past fossil...

Pleeeeeeeeese get your "insane" commentary correct.




LIGHTNING [NL]

FH2 Developer

50 XP

30th May 2003

0 Uploads

9,811 Posts

0 Threads

#23 15 years ago
Saquistbiology is the study of living things not the evolution of living things or the evolution of past fossil...

Yes, but the point of studying living things is to understand them. And you can't understand something if you do not know it's past. In biology there are a lot of things that are explained by evolution. As a biochemistry student, there is not one of my classes where biology is taught, without mentioning evolution.




-Aqualung-

GF's Sexiest Banjo Player

50 XP

4th May 2004

0 Uploads

1,119 Posts

0 Threads

#24 15 years ago
Saquistbiology is the study of living things not the evolution of living things or the evolution of past fossil... Pleeeeeeeeese get your "insane" commentary correct.

Biology has everything to do with evolution. To study living things we must understand how they evolved. And as for the thing about college being for theory, and high school and such for "facts," that is also flawed. Evolution is backed by facts, even as a theory. It is the most factual account of how life came to be as it is. And theories are taught in schools all the time, like in english, like the binomial theorem.




Smitty025

The local Paultard

74,515 XP

24th May 2003

0 Uploads

6,469 Posts

0 Threads

#25 15 years ago
Saquistbiology is the study of living things not the evolution of living things or the evolution of past fossil... Pleeeeeeeeese get your "insane" commentary correct.[/QUOTE] My bio teacher would probaby have ripped out your throat by now. Biology most certainly involves evolution. [QUOTE=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology]Biology is the study, or science, of life. It is concerned with the characteristics and behaviors of organisms, how species and individuals come into existence, and the interactions they have with each other and with the environment. Biology encompasses a broad spectrum of academic fields that are often viewed as independent disciplines. However, together they address the phenomenon of life over a wide range of scales. ................................................................................... Evolution: The central principle of biology Main article: Evolution The central organizing concept in biology is that all life has a common origin and has changed and developed through the process of evolution (see Common descent). This has led to the striking similarity of units and processes discussed in the previous section. Charles Darwin established evolution as a viable theory by articulating its driving force, natural selection (Alfred Russell Wallace is recognized as the co-discoverer of this concept). Genetic drift was embraced as an additional mechanism of evolutionary development in the modern synthesis of the theory.

I could find many more things that state evolution is part of biology.




Psychokenesis

I'm too cool to Post

136,505 XP

15th October 2003

0 Uploads

13,428 Posts

0 Threads

#26 15 years ago

the past is different study from biology. Biology deals with the present organism's state. Anything else is theory....the past or future and theory has little bearing on the present teachings which are clearly observable and provable. Of course there is legimacy to study the past but its limited to the fossil record. :Edit

I surely you can see the conflict of intrest here. I've had those same classes. I came to the conclussion that they didn't know what they were talking about...They deal in maybes and then when one dosen't work they make up another theory...Nothing wrong with that...sure.

But why are they forcing the kids to accpet an un proven theory? Biology has nothing to do with theory. But they rage on about accepting any other theory. Instead why isn't it apart of a different and various collection of theories...

Doesn't sound like we're confussing the students? Its theory but its practically proven? Is there any such thing as practicaly proven? I 'm at a lost for words as to why this POV is accepted by people you proclaim to be our path way to the future..

They're not even accepting the fact they could be wrong and another theory in the future will explain it...

Doesn't that strike you as pompus and like those religious nuts that locked and killed people for saying anything but the world is flat.

Edit: And Smitty I've taken down more than my fair share of scienct teacher in high school and college for there appearnt faith in evolution. Its a mountain of evidence against evolution. So large I've found no one scientist can defend against. They've all failed. But thats not the point. Its a theory. Nothing else but a theory. What ever happen to scientific objectivity....Its certainly not there on this topic.




-Aqualung-

GF's Sexiest Banjo Player

50 XP

4th May 2004

0 Uploads

1,119 Posts

0 Threads

#27 15 years ago
Saquistthe past is different study from biology. Biology deals with the present organism's state. Anything else is theory....the past or future and theory has little bearing on the present teachings which are clearly observable and provable. I surely you can see the conflict of intrest here. I've had those same classes. I can to the conclussion that they didn't know what they were talking about...They deal in maybes and then when one dosen't work they make up another theory...Nothing wrong with that...sure. But why are they forcing the kids to accpet an un proven theory? Biology has nothing with theory. But rage on about accepting any other theory. Instead why isn't it apart of a different... Doesn't sound like we're confussing the students? Its theory but its practically proven? Is there any such thing as practical proven? I 'm at a lost for words as to why this POV is accepted by people you proclaim to be our path way to the future.. They're not even accepting the fact they could be wrong and another theory in the future will explain it... Doesn't that strike you as pompus and like those religious nuts that locked and killed people for saying anything but the world is flat.

This is all wrong. Biology INCLUDES the study of life's past, just like etymology involves the study of a word and its origins. The past of it has everything to do with its present. The only people who seem confused by a practically proven theory seem to be you close minded intelligent designers (creationists).




Psychokenesis

I'm too cool to Post

136,505 XP

15th October 2003

0 Uploads

13,428 Posts

0 Threads

#28 15 years ago

But the past isn't provable and you know that to be true....thus Theory.

I don't find error in your statement just a failure to realise the two are different purposes no mather the relation.

And I'm not creationist...I belive in God...please don think that I beat around that particular bush. I m not afraid to think differently than the norm. In fact if there is a different perspective I'll search for its. Oblivion is the atrophy of knowledge.




Force Recon

Semper fidelis

50 XP

10th July 2004

0 Uploads

2,637 Posts

0 Threads

#29 15 years ago

Good thing thye banned it.There are some holes in the evolution theory but I believe that should be taught in science classes but not ID.




-Aqualung-

GF's Sexiest Banjo Player

50 XP

4th May 2004

0 Uploads

1,119 Posts

0 Threads

#30 15 years ago
SaquistBut the past isn't provable and you know that to be true....thus Theory.

The past isn't provable 100%, but then again nothing is. But if you see a trail of footprints leading into a cave and hear noises coming out, would you say someone walked in or that a divine creator created the thing inside and then made the footprints for no reason?