Total Motorcycle Community Forums

http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle.jh ... GetContent

Spotted this one on Reuters, and it peaked my interest.

Personally I'm a athiest, so I'd obviously side with Darwin everytime, but I acknowledge this is a major point of controversy between what our children are taught, and what we would like them to be taught. I thought I'd test the water, and see what peoples thoughts on this are...

I think the big mistake is people who beleive it has to be one or the other. There are too many tunnel visioned religious fools who will not accept any other theory except for what the Bible indicates. I believe in a Deity but I don't believe in the Bible. I refuse to accept a book which was translated more times over than the earth had rain. On top of that, even in todays translation, many people interpret the meaning of a passage to what they want to believe. If that happens now, how do they think it was interpreted during those translations? The Bible is a book of stories which some christians WANTED you to read all the while, which many people aren't aware of, there were more pages omitted from the Bible than the amount of pages it contains now.

Back to evolution..My belief is a mixture of the two. Science proves everything while religion doesn't. Archeologists have proven the existence of dinosaurs and other fossils which were never mentioned in the Bible, at least not that i'm aware of. But I believe evolution since obviously, genetic mutation is proven, but I believe a higher deity is the cause of evolution. If people would open their minds to more logical and proven theories, this religous war could end and a new learning experience would exist for our kids.

To assume that God would do things the way man would, or that man could understand God, much less his methods, is incorrect to me. That's the kind of thing the arrogant and power-hungry med-EVIL clergy came up with. At the least, they took the basic principles of 'religion for power's sake' that the ancients started and ran wild with it.

I like to think that God is clever enough to create a ever-changing and evolving universe, not a static model of one. And I'm pretty sure mankind is not the pinicle of that creation...

If you really read that article, the "Scientists" have a really closed view of how the whole thing works. Primarily, they immediately want to dismiss any explanation that doesn't coincide with their own egocentric views of the way we all got here.

If you will notice, the challange does not want to admit the Bible into classrooms, but only wants teachers to discuss alternative theories in classrooms. Evolutionary science is just as much a belief as Creationism - and when you tell someone their beliefs may not be right, they have a fit.

I also think this is extraordinarily insulting and condescending -

Ken Schmitz, a University of Missouri/Kansas City chemistry professor attending the hearing said he worried that the attack on evolution could confuse students and endanger their ability to excel in science.

"They are not going to understand this," said Schmitz.

Not only is that statement extrordinarily ignorant, it makes me want to smack this guy. With a baseball bat. Science is defined as the observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.

If you give students more theories and hypotheses, you allow them to make more use of the scientific process. By excluding all theories and hypotheses except for the one you believe in you totally remove the students from any real usage of the scientific process - you spoon feed them what you want them to know so their young minds can regress into mush at an early age. It's not science, it's indoctrination if there aren't any competeing theories introduced.

I seem to have forgotten, so could one of you nerds remind me which of those scientific journals is it that has outsold the bible? Ijust know it will come to me. Even if you don't believe in the afterlife etc. you have to admit the way Jesus taught in parboles had even the sharpest minds of the time at a loss for words. And besides it will be o.k. with me if mankind treated each other a little kinder in the long run than wheater or not we are here because of the BIG BANG THEORY. One final jab, if I'm wrong then there is no big loss to you either way, but if your wrong, hell may not be so much fun. I just couldn't resist one more. That is why the world celebrates Big Bang Day etc. and Christmas, easter and all that other crap takes the back seat. RIGHT.

TechBMW wrote:If you really read that article, the "Scientists" have a really closed view of how the whole thing works. Primarily, they immediately want to dismiss any explanation that doesn't coincide with their own egocentric views of the way we all got here.

If you will notice, the challange does not want to admit the Bible into classrooms, but only wants teachers to discuss alternative theories in classrooms. Evolutionary science is just as much a belief as Creationism - and when you tell someone their beliefs may not be right, they have a fit.

Whilst I'm not trying to defend this opinion, it's a basic character trait of most scientists...
The mind set works along the lines of:

1) look at the problem, and develop a theory to match it...
2) Try to find physical evidence to either prove or disprove your theory
3) adapt your theory and re-apply step 2

Creationism is a theory which although it may be correct, denies any supporting evidence. Which is why a lot of scientists (and to an extent myself) find it difficult to believe.

In my opinion, the purpose of science lessons are to develop analytical skills, which the darwinian model supports. however I also believe that although they don't have a major place from the science perspective, the creationist models are important from both a religious education, and philosophical perspective, and should be incorporated there.

Andy

BDRONAGOLDWING wrote:I seem to have forgotten, so could one of you nerds remind me which of those scientific journals is it that has outsold the bible? Ijust know it will come to me. Even if you don't believe in the afterlife etc. you have to admit the way Jesus taught in parboles had even the sharpest minds of the time at a loss for words. And besides it will be o.k. with me if mankind treated each other a little kinder in the long run than wheater or not we are here because of the BIG BANG THEORY. One final jab, if I'm wrong then there is no big loss to you either way, but if your wrong, hell may not be so much fun. I just couldn't resist one more. That is why the world celebrates Big Bang Day etc. and Christmas, easter and all that other "crumb" takes the back seat. RIGHT.

Uumm, what does the number of bibles sold have to do with anything? I agree that it is a great book, and teaches many exellent lessons, but it is a compolation of books selected by PEOPLE, written by PEOPLE hundreds or thousands of years after the events they wrote about. Those facts alone make me doubt it is the word of God (same goes for the Koran and any other religious texts), infact, I believe that when God speaks to you, you will know, in no uncertain terms. A book written by ancient mankind in the depths of history is interesting and can contain much wisdom, but that doesn't mean it is The Word Of God. God should be inside you and not based on the ideas of people thought the earth was flat, women were not real people, slavery was O.K. and only certain, privilaged people could intrupret God's word.

But that's just what I believe, you are welcome to believe whatever you like.

Don't call me a nerd again. You haven't come close to earning that right yet.

Nibblet99 wrote: Whilst I'm not trying to defend this opinion, it's a basic character trait of most scientists...
The mind set works along the lines of:

1) look at the problem, and develop a theory to match it...
2) Try to find physical evidence to either prove or disprove your theory
3) adapt your theory and re-apply step 2

Creationism is a theory which although it may be correct, denies any supporting evidence. Which is why a lot of scientists (and to an extent myself) find it difficult to believe.

In my opinion, the purpose of science lessons are to develop analytical skills, which the darwinian model supports. however I also believe that although they don't have a major place from the science perspective, the creationist models are important from both a religious education, and philosophical perspective, and should be incorporated there.

Andy

I can see what you are getting at here. What burns me is when scientists and educators dismiss something out of hand simply because it's a religious teaching. I'm not a 'religious' guy. But I do think that there are legitimate scientifically accurate teachings in the Bible. Whether passed on from God, or discovered by ancient man (The same guys who built the Pyramids Machu Pichu and Stonehenge, right) there are legitimate teachings that can be proven scientifically.

I can get into a long discussion on the merits of Creationism, vs, the merits of Darwinism. I really didn't believe creationist views until I started researching the topic from a Scientific, and not religious standpoint. There are plenty of arguements for creationism which I believe are stronger than the evolutionist theories. However, that's a topic for another thread I'd be glad to PM you with more info if you are interested in reading about it from a scientific perspective and not a religious one.

As for the scientific analysis

1) look at the problem, and develop a theory to match it...
2) Try to find physical evidence to either prove or disprove your theory
3) adapt your theory and re-apply step 2

This isn't practiced in the classroom - basically because students already have the theory given to them (evolution) Then they are given the scientific evidence to back up the particular theory. The analytical thought has already been done for them. Here is another place where creationism spurs on the student's analytical skills because all the work hasn't been done for them - They have to come up with answers that the modern PhD's aren't out there giving them on a silver platter. Students can also use competing theories to form their own opinions on the subject - thus enhancing their analytical skills. If only one theory is presented, there's nothing to think about. This is what teacher wants, this is what teacher gets.

This isn't only applicable to the "Beginning of the World" debate. Students really miss out on analytical/troubleshooting/problem solving skills throughout the education process - and that's why I feel this particular topic is just a small part of what's wrong with education today. Practical technical applications - Fixing a carburettor, for example - troubleshooting a computer problem, thinking of ways to end pollution, ending city gridlock, etc etc etc - all these are problems that can be solved using analytical skill.

They cannot be solved, however, if our students are continually spoonfed questions and their answers without being given a real chance to answer the questions on their own - or - disprove or defend certain theories.

Just as young children can pick up another language with relative ease, so they can develop analytical and freethinking skills. Waiting until they get to the college level to develop these skills not only makes the process much harder, but I believe it stunts the analytical ability for life.

BDRONAGOLDWING wrote:I seem to have forgotten, so could one of you nerds remind me which of those scientific journals is it that has outsold the bible?

Unfortunately for you, that's irrelevant. There are many hypocrites who will cheat on their spouse, sexually abuse their kids, fight with their neighbors and still attend church services pretending to be the down home all american religious role model. Most of the people who purchase the Bible don't do so to read it, they do so to display their so called faith for others to see. After all, image is everything and making others believe you are something you really aren't is the primary goal in life.

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

This is the first verse in the bible. And the Big Bang Theory an attempt to explain the beginning. Evolution and Creation......hmm......which one do I chose? The most basic evolution theory(correct me if I'm wrong) is that everything came from everything else. Given enough time and the right circumstances things will begin to grow and evolve into bigger and better things than what they were. As we have all seen the evolution of ape to man chart. So if you put a molecule next to others it will, over time, join and grow until it reaches perfection. if we look at what happens with actaul objects we can see Evidence that evolution is actually backwards of what REALLY happens.

Take a Corvette for example. One of the most popular and powerful cars on the market. An evoutionsist will tell you that if you take all the parts needed to build a corvette and put them under a tarp and waited a long time, eventually you will have a corvette. So you take the parts and set them together and you leave them. Lets say for 5 years. You go out and look under the tarp and what do you find? A CORVETTE!!!???? in fact its the opposite. as you look at the parts you laid down 5 years ago you probably won't find many of them. On the metal you will see rust. On the tires there will be decay and many things will have totally disappeared without ever getting any closer to acheiving a corvette. and thats only 5 years. wait another 10, 20, let alone 50 million years and you won't even know what was there.

BUT if you give those parts to a corvette MAKER... you will have your crovette in a limited amount of time. And when you look at it you give credit to Chevy for MAKING an awesome vehicle.

Now to eveyone's responses. Starting in the beginning. Nibblet99 is concerned about what the kids are being taught. To force acceptance of one over the other is wrong. Evolution is a theory and should be an idea that is acknowleded, but not tought. In the other hand Faith in God is a whole other thing. To force religion on kids in schools is also wrong. Especially if the religion is the WRONG one. Jesus didn't come with force, but with love and an option for us to CHOSE. And it is our decision.

To Meanie: I may appear as one of those religious fools stuck in tunnel vision. Thats ok. I used to not care. and I have tested both sides. You believe in a deity. In other words a "god" of some sort. The Bible clearly talks about the worship of "other gods".
Exodus 20:3 You shall have no other gods before Me. This is a declaration from God the Almighty. In other words the Deity that causes all things to exist. If you look into todays modern translations of the BIble, you will find the NIV(New International VERSION) This is a DIRECT translation from the original hebrew, greek and aramaic texts. They went to Extensive processes to ensure the validity of the texts and translations. So the Bible is a direct copy of the ancient languages to english. But I have to agree with you that many people take the Word of God and bend it to suit their own will. This is not a new thing. Thats why we must get into to the word to understand who is praising God and who is praising other things. If you read in Job chapters 40-42 there is mention of great beasts. The Behemoth and the Laviathan. not exactly sure if dinosaurs or not, but an animal that is untamable. Check it out. And as far logic goes. Proverbs 3:5 says to , "Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding...."

To Buzz's firt comment. well said. God is clever, but we are his creation. he does not leave us to ourselves. He is ever watchful over the things we do. Though there are great things in the universe. we are not overlooked. And he loved us enough to make a way for us to be with Him.

To TechBMW . I agree. Science is the search for explanations of events and happenings. To rule out one certain factor can eliminate endless possilbities of what the actual answer might be.

And to Meanie's second comment. It is sad that you bring up the mistakes of man. Because we all can relate in one way or another. In Colossians 3:5-8 it says this to Christians but is applicable to all, " Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry. Because of these, the wrath of God is coming. You used to walk in these ways, in the lofe you once lived. But now you must rid yourself of all such things as these......." And the truth is, we are hypocrites. The lives we live are in constant view of everyone else. We all wear a mask at one time or another to hide something we don't want others to see.(def-hypocrite) But God sees all things. And he will bring all deeds whether good or evil to judgment. It is sad that the Bible is misrepresented by the action of the ones who carry it. And truthfully ...owning a bible doesn't make you a Christian. Niether does going to church. But recognition of sin is the first step to reaching the Lord. In Matthew 7:21 Jesus said, " Not everyone who says to me 'Lord, Lord' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven." There is a difference between pleasing God and pleasing man.

This is a debate that will go on until the end of us. No one can prove how the beginning began. But Prophesies and Fulfulment of those lead me to faith in Christ. And through him I can have hope of reaching heaven; escaping hell, my due punishment for MY sin. We all came from somewhere. And we are all headed somewhere. Whatever you chose to believe I hope I have encouraged and persuaded some ideas.