Kansas votes for Intelligent Design

[alkemyst]

Here is my take on it all. If there was a Creator, wouldn't he have been smart enough to allow of the evolution of his creations as their surroundings changed.

You can still have the debate of Creator or 'Big Bang', but IMHO evolution is scientifically proven, and that proof has nothing to do with or without the existance of a Creator.

Problem is most zealots and fanatics don't even know what they are arguing nor how to facilitate a proper debate.

Instead it's all about why the other is wrong, rather than how they are right.

 

[shimsham]

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: shimsham
wheres the problem? sounds like democracy in action. the citizens of missouri want it taught, so they voted it in.

Missouri != Kansas

and the people didn't vote....only the school board officials.

the people vote the officials in, correct? im sure they held hearings and constituents voiced their opinion in calls and letters before taking a vote, and will be held accoutable come next election if the people dont agree with this decision.

 

[broon]

Originally posted by: shimsham

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: shimsham
wheres the problem? sounds like democracy in action. the citizens of missouri want it taught, so they voted it in.

Missouri != Kansas

and the people didn't vote....only the school board officials.

the people vote the officials in, correct? im sure they held hearings and constituents voiced their opinion in calls and letters before taking a vote, and will be held accoutable come next election if the people dont agree with this decision.

Using that logic...The citizens of the US are <insert comment here> because GWB did such and such. The citizens voted for him so they vote for everything he does.

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
This is particularly sad given that the Roman Catholic Church has officially endorsed Darwinian Evolution and rejected Creationism.

http://www.news.com.au/story/print/0,10119,17162341,00.html

ZV

That fact that the Roman Catholic Church did that is the saddest.

 

[Ilmater]

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats
KDOT > MoDOT

Gah! FVCK! You got me there.

 

[HumblePie]

Originally posted by: broon
They shouldn't be teaching ID or Darwinism. Creationism belongs in the home and at church, not at school. Darwinism can't be proven so it doesn't belong there either.

Sigh, I can't believe someone said something this stupid.

Look, there are TONS of stuff under the realm of science that can't be prove but are used everyday.

Can you say the THEORY of electricity anyone? Of the THEORY of gravity? You know, those aren't exactly proven ether right? So why are they taught? Because they are theories gained by using the scientific method.

How the Scientific Method works 101... for newbs who never went to a real school.

1) State a hypothesis.
2) Test to disprove that hypothesis.
3) If the old hypothesis is disproved by tests, create a NEW hypothesis thatfits better with the data collected.
4) repeat step 2.

That's it in a nutshell. The whole point of science is to come up with ideas of how and why the universe and everything within it works. We come up with our best guess that fits the data that's available. If that data is proven wrong in ANYWAY, that guess is thrown out and a new one is formulated based off the existing evidence gathered. NOTHING in the how's or why's of science is deemed hard or concrete. Only the method is. However, you teach science with that in mind. You show people the current theory and the body of evidence that supports it and ways to disprove it. Of which we currently may be incapable of disproving with our availabl methods to test from.

Take electricity for example. The THEORY on that has such a wide body of tests that support it. We can actually USE those tests in an real world applicable way as well. Does that prove electricity exists? No. However, none of these we currently have available can disprove the theory of electricity. All the tests we can come up with only support the theory of electricity. That doesn't mean a thousand years from now someone can't come up with an idea for a test and disprove electricity and say it's "metachlorins" for example (using a stupid star wars refence on the "force").

Now take creationism. In an of itself... it's a THEORY as well from the scientific standpoint. The problem? You can't do ANY tests. There are zero tests to either prove or disprove it. In the science word, since you can't test it, you can't even call it a theory. This is why it has ZERO place in a science room to be taught. It should be taught as religion which teaches people to view the world on "beliefs" and "faith." Which is all fine and dandy for them but means squat when it comes to science.

 

[Rebasxer]

I just think it's funny that the true form of chrisitainity, the church established by Jesus (The Catholic Church) says that it doesn't matter whether God created man by evolution or not, but that he created it. All the Catholic priests I've talked to think that intelligent design shouldnt be taught in a science class because its not a scientic theory.

 

[shimsham]

Originally posted by: Ilmater

Originally posted by: shimsham
wheres the problem? sounds like democracy in action. the citizens of missouri want it taught, so they voted it in.

A) It wasn't the citizens of anywhere, it was the school board members.
B) Don't besmirch the great state of Missouri. This is a Kansas thing.

A)which again are voted in by the people, held hearings, and will be held accountable next election.
B)i swear the op said missouri last night when i first saw this thread. but, i had had a few :beers;.

 

[SMOGZINN]

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: broon
Darwin's theory is not any different than ID. Both are someone's idea of how things were. Neither belong in the classroom.

That's where you're wrong. The theory of evolution has generally been accepted by the scientific community, and as such belongs in a science class. ID has generally been rejected by the scientific community, so it does not belong in a science class. The theory of evolution is a deep subject, whereas ID is basically a footnote.

Its still a Theory.

that can not be proven and never will be proven. In fact I was watching MSNBC a few weeks ago and they had a report that at several large universities the science depts are taking a step back away from Darwins theory because the theory is just that and may be wrong. Dont ask me which universities because i dont remember.

ALL SCIENCE IS THEORY.
Outside of mathematics nothing can be proven.
Gravity, theory.
Thermodynamics, theory.
Electromagnetics, theory.
In fact, name any given field of science and it is nothing but theory built on theory, build on even more theory. So if ?several large universities the science depts are taking a step back away from Darwins theory because the theory is just that and may be wrong? then they need to completely cancel their entire Natural Sciences and Engineering departments, as no theory they have is any better then evolution.

The difference between science, (theory of evolution) and religion (intelligent design) is that science follows a set of rules. We can use these rules to evaluate a theory. The rules set down ways for a theory to be disproved, and encourage scientists to use the rules to try to disprove theories.
Religion creates a set of rules to prove their belief, and if the theory should be disproved they change the rules instead of the belief.
ID is not like Evolutionary Theory.
Evolutionary theory can not be proven, but can be disproved.
ID can not even be investigated.

 

[Powermoloch]

I submit to the mighty NOODLE !

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: Rebasxer
I just think it's funny that the true form of chrisitainity, the church established by Jesus (The Catholic Church) says that it doesn't matter whether God created man by evolution or not, but that he created it. All the Catholic priests I've talked to think that intelligent design shouldnt be taught in a science class because its not a scientic theory.

That must be the difference between the Catholics and the fundamentalists/evangelists.

 

[shimsham]

Originally posted by: broon

Originally posted by: shimsham

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: shimsham
wheres the problem? sounds like democracy in action. the citizens of missouri want it taught, so they voted it in.

Missouri != Kansas

and the people didn't vote....only the school board officials.

the people vote the officials in, correct? im sure they held hearings and constituents voiced their opinion in calls and letters before taking a vote, and will be held accoutable come next election if the people dont agree with this decision.

Using that logic...The citizens of the US are <insert comment here> because GWB did such and such. The citizens voted for him so they vote for everything he does.

pretty much, yeah. its not like you dont know what youre getting when you vote for someone, unless you have youre head in a hole.

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: thraashman
I get so sick of people using the excuse that it's just a theory because they obviously don't understand what that means. A theory is not just some concept someone thought up one day and everyone then said, "yeah that sounds good we'll use that." Technically in biology, which is the realm of science evolution falls under, there are no laws like in physics. Very few things can actually be "proven" in biology. Theory is actually as high as it goes, once something makes theory it means it went through tons of research and tests to make it this far. Many many aspects of evolution can be proven, and that's why it continues to exist. Nothing has been disproven, it just hasn't yet been implicitly proven. And, seeing as how many of the things that we can prove about biology, evolution, and history directly contradict most religions, by scientific viewpoint, we have disproven religion.

show us some examples of this proof.

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: shimsham

Originally posted by: broon

Originally posted by: shimsham

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: shimsham
wheres the problem? sounds like democracy in action. the citizens of missouri want it taught, so they voted it in.

Missouri != Kansas

and the people didn't vote....only the school board officials.

the people vote the officials in, correct? im sure they held hearings and constituents voiced their opinion in calls and letters before taking a vote, and will be held accoutable come next election if the people dont agree with this decision.

Using that logic...The citizens of the US are <insert comment here> because GWB did such and such. The citizens voted for him so they vote for everything he does.

pretty much, yeah. its not like you dont know what youre getting when you vote for someone, unless you have youre head in a hole.

Yeah? And what about all the poor bastards that voted for the other guy?

 

[CaptnKirk]

I would expect nothing less from a state that has Senator Pat Roberts as head of the Intelligence Committee

 

[shimsham]

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: shimsham

Originally posted by: broon

Originally posted by: shimsham

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: shimsham
wheres the problem? sounds like democracy in action. the citizens of missouri want it taught, so they voted it in.

Missouri != Kansas

and the people didn't vote....only the school board officials.

the people vote the officials in, correct? im sure they held hearings and constituents voiced their opinion in calls and letters before taking a vote, and will be held accoutable come next election if the people dont agree with this decision.

Using that logic...The citizens of the US are <insert comment here> because GWB did such and such. The citizens voted for him so they vote for everything he does.

pretty much, yeah. its not like you dont know what youre getting when you vote for someone, unless you have youre head in a hole.

Yeah? And what about all the poor bastards that voted for the other guy?

they lost, just like someone has to in an election. next time they work harder and try to get the votes to swing their way so they win.

 

[Ilmater]

Originally posted by: broon

Originally posted by: shimsham

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: shimsham
wheres the problem? sounds like democracy in action. the citizens of missouri want it taught, so they voted it in.

Missouri != Kansas

and the people didn't vote....only the school board officials.

the people vote the officials in, correct? im sure they held hearings and constituents voiced their opinion in calls and letters before taking a vote, and will be held accoutable come next election if the people dont agree with this decision.

Using that logic...The citizens of the US are <insert comment here> because GWB did such and such. The citizens voted for him so they vote for everything he does.

SLAM! Dum dah dum. Dum dah dum.

 

[Ilmater]

Originally posted by: shimsham

Originally posted by: Ilmater

Originally posted by: shimsham
wheres the problem? sounds like democracy in action. the citizens of missouri want it taught, so they voted it in.

A) It wasn't the citizens of anywhere, it was the school board members.
B) Don't besmirch the great state of Missouri. This is a Kansas thing.

A)which again are voted in by the people, held hearings, and will be held accountable next election.
B)i swear the op said missouri last night when i first saw this thread. but, i had had a few :beers;.

A) To use Broon's point, you then completely agree with anything that Bush/Cheney/US Congress, etc. does.
B) I AM the OP, and I assure you it wasn't in there, and that I was sober.

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: thraashman
I get so sick of people using the excuse that it's just a theory because they obviously don't understand what that means. A theory is not just some concept someone thought up one day and everyone then said, "yeah that sounds good we'll use that." Technically in biology, which is the realm of science evolution falls under, there are no laws like in physics. Very few things can actually be "proven" in biology. Theory is actually as high as it goes, once something makes theory it means it went through tons of research and tests to make it this far. Many many aspects of evolution can be proven, and that's why it continues to exist. Nothing has been disproven, it just hasn't yet been implicitly proven. And, seeing as how many of the things that we can prove about biology, evolution, and history directly contradict most religions, by scientific viewpoint, we have disproven religion.

show us some examples of this proof.

Here's some
Look at me!
Check stuff out here, too
And here

 

[shimsham]

Originally posted by: Ilmater

Originally posted by: shimsham

Originally posted by: Ilmater

Originally posted by: shimsham
wheres the problem? sounds like democracy in action. the citizens of missouri want it taught, so they voted it in.

A) It wasn't the citizens of anywhere, it was the school board members.
B) Don't besmirch the great state of Missouri. This is a Kansas thing.

A)which again are voted in by the people, held hearings, and will be held accountable next election.
B)i swear the op said missouri last night when i first saw this thread. but, i had had a few :beers;.

A) To use Broon's point, you then completely agree with anything that Bush/Cheney/US Congress, etc. does.
B) I AM the OP, and I assure you it wasn't in there, and that I was sober.

A) i voted for kerry. i have yet to vote for anyone that i agree with everything they do. anyone that agrees with everything a politician does is 99% of the time a zealot or partisan hack. its no secret that youre mostly voting for the lesser of 2 evils and the one that most closely fits your views, so why is anyone expecting 100%?
B) oh, please, forgive me....

 

[TuxDave]

It's pretty clean that people have been successfully brainwashed with the 'it's JUST a theory, that's why they call it a theory' propaganda. How sad.

 

[Ilmater]

The last thing I'm going to say is this:

Evolution CAN be proven, as much as ANY biological theory can. More importantly, you CAN test the theory. Over the course of hundreds and thousands of years, we can monitor species and see if they evolve to adapt to their changing environments.
ID CANNOT EVER be proven, and CANNOT EVER be tested. It is what it is.

Therefore, you teach evolution and mention that many don't believe it's possible (the law of entropy, for instance, would to some be contradictory to evolution). That's it.

I also want to mention that my biggest problem is that they rewrote the definition of science in order to teach what they want to teach. The rest is whatever it is, but this is FLAT-OUT WRONG!

Originally posted by: sixone
Did you RTFA?

The new standards contain an explicit disclaimer saying they're not designed to promote intelligent design

Maybe you should work on the reading comprehension before you go spouting off?!?

This is a tough issue, and one that's not going to have a solution that makes everyone happy.

Yes, I live in Kansas, and I disagree with part of their decision, and agree with others.

The question is, did YOU RTFA?

In addition, the board rewrote the standards' definition of science, so that it is no longer limited to the search for natural explanations of phenomena.

 

[Ilmater]

Originally posted by: shimsham
A) i voted for kerry. i have yet to vote for anyone that i agree with everything they do. anyone that agrees with everything a politician does is 99% of the time a zealot or partisan hack. its no secret that youre mostly voting for the lesser of 2 evils and the one that most closely fits your views, so why is anyone expecting 100%?

AGH! WTF is wrong with you? If you believe that, then why did you say:

wheres the problem? sounds like democracy in action. the citizens of missouri want it taught, so they voted it in.

 

[shimsham]

Originally posted by: Ilmater

Originally posted by: shimsham
A) i voted for kerry. i have yet to vote for anyone that i agree with everything they do. anyone that agrees with everything a politician does is 99% of the time a zealot or partisan hack. its no secret that youre mostly voting for the lesser of 2 evils and the one that most closely fits your views, so why is anyone expecting 100%?

AGH! WTF is wrong with you? If you believe that, then why did you say:

wheres the problem? sounds like democracy in action. the citizens of missouri want it taught, so they voted it in.

lol, nothing wrong with me. i assume before the officials were voted in they had ads and such that explained their stance on religion and id as its such a hot topic. knowing this, people voted for them. i would also assume before the board made this decision they had hearings and weighed the opinions of their constituents, and voted accordingly. if they didnt, they will be voted out come next election.

so while the citizens didnt directly vote on it(which i incorrectly thought), they elected the officials, knowing their stance, to represent them. if the officials dont represent the constituents the way they want them to, they will be replaced.

 

[skace]

Originally posted by: Spoooon
Now, when they teach intelligent design in the classroom, are they limited to a Christian divine being? I think that, as long as they are going to teach the kids intelligent design, they ought to also introduce the possibility that some other supreme being or beings is responsible. Greek gods anyone?

At my school, this class was called "World Religions" and was not combined with friggen "Science". That is what annoys me the most.