Started By
Message
re: Intelligent Design Vs. Evolution
Posted on 4/10/14 at 1:15 am to TbirdSpur2010
Posted on 4/10/14 at 1:15 am to TbirdSpur2010
quote:
Eh, you can use religion in your life, too.
Well of course you can.. but it takes alot of time to teach 30 plus views of religion. How much time should be spent on it? Or are we just gonna teach religions and stop teaching math, science, Non-relgious history, english/spelling, ect?
1
Posted on 4/10/14 at 1:29 am to NATidefan
quote:
How much time should be spent on it?
I don't know. I'm not in the educational profession.
quote:
Or are we just gonna teach religions and stop teaching math, science, Non-relgious history, english/spelling, ect?
Nowhere did I say that.
Look, I get that you're just trying to continue the conversation, but all I was doing was answering your query about whether differing viewpoints should be taught side by side, since it miffed you that I missed responding to you. My answer is "yes," but I'm not going to front and say I have all the answers logistically, either. That's a whole 'nother discussion.
Posted on 4/10/14 at 1:50 am to TbirdSpur2010
hey, you came in with a lot of opinions to share...
Like I said, either share them and stick around or get out...
NA-
T-bird
well you seemed to have a view on religion being taught in schools vs. evolution being taught in schools... so you're opinion just ends on they should both be taught... FANTASTIC...
Like I said, either share them and stick around or get out...
NA-
quote:
How much time should be spent on it?
T-bird
quote:
I don't know. I'm not in the educational profession.
well you seemed to have a view on religion being taught in schools vs. evolution being taught in schools... so you're opinion just ends on they should both be taught... FANTASTIC...
Posted on 4/10/14 at 2:16 am to NATidefan
quote:
hey, you came in with a lot of opinions to share...
Not really. I came in exasperated that this inane "religion vs. science" thread popped up.
quote:
well you seemed to have a view on religion being taught in schools vs. evolution being taught in schools
No, you tried to put words in my mouth and make it seem like I was pitting one vs. the other in schools, when that wasn't the case.
quote:
so you're opinion just ends on they should both be taught
That was my answer to the question YOU asked, man.
quote:
FANTASTIC
Why the hell are you spoiling for an argument? I'm not just going to pull a curriculum out of my arse, dude.
Posted on 4/10/14 at 7:27 am to TbirdSpur2010
quote:
Why the hell are you spoiling for an argument? I'm not just going to pull a curriculum out of my arse, dude.
Usually if you disagree with something, it's an Elenchus obligation to provide an alternative: especially when regarding things like education.
So if you wish for ID (debunked, we actually had a trial for it) to be taught aside a hard scientific theory (not to be confused with a theory), you generally need to come up with an ideal way.
Otherwise you're just sort of fizzing, like piss in a bucket.
Posted on 4/10/14 at 7:32 am to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:
Usually if you disagree with something, it's an Elenchus obligation
I disagreed with nothing. I simply answered a question.
Posted on 4/10/14 at 8:23 am to TbirdSpur2010
quote:
Why the hell are you spoiling for an argument? I'm not just going to pull a curriculum out of my arse, dude.
quote:
I disagreed with nothing. I simply answered a question.
But ya did, you posited a position without any way to enact it.
Posted on 4/10/14 at 8:36 am to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
I answered a question. I'm not going to sit here and shite out a curriculum because you're dissatisfied with my answer. That's disingenuous.
Posted on 4/10/14 at 8:41 am to MontyFranklyn
The fact these threads make it to 25+ pages is a sign of how fricked our country is.
2014....
Believing in a higher power, k, sure it's possible.
Following an organized religion, LOL something is fricking wrong with you people.
2014....
Believing in a higher power, k, sure it's possible.
Following an organized religion, LOL something is fricking wrong with you people.
Posted on 4/10/14 at 8:47 am to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
And I did it as a favor to NATide because he was wrapped around the axle that I left him hanging a few pages back. Not even trying to get into a huge religion vs. science debate because it's a road to nowhere, like I already mentioned.
I don't have any problem with opposing viewpoints being taught side by side. That, I suppose, is my "position."
I don't have any problem with opposing viewpoints being taught side by side. That, I suppose, is my "position."
Posted on 4/10/14 at 9:21 am to TbirdSpur2010
quote:
I don't have any problem with opposing viewpoints being taught side by side. That, I suppose, is my "position."
quote:
Not even trying to get into a huge religion vs. science debate because it's a road to nowhere, like I already mentioned.
Yeah man you're not winning me over -- you made an argument and then gave no way on how to implement it. That's a weaksauce approach to this debate and a quick way to not get taken seriously.
Which you'll promptly respond that you don't care and we'll get along with our lives with your incomplete response. It's clearly unsatisfactory not only to myself and Tide but to organized conversation in general.
Posted on 4/10/14 at 9:25 am to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
Just to end this argument
Why don't they spend the day or whatever they want to on evolution. And then spend another day or whatever teaching creationism and lumping the major creationist theories together giving a truncated breakdown of the different versions of each. If there is something other than evolution and creationism, that can go next.
Why don't they spend the day or whatever they want to on evolution. And then spend another day or whatever teaching creationism and lumping the major creationist theories together giving a truncated breakdown of the different versions of each. If there is something other than evolution and creationism, that can go next.
Posted on 4/10/14 at 9:32 am to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:
Yeah man you're not winning me over -- you made an argument and then gave no way on how to implement it. That's a weaksauce approach to this debate and a quick way to not get taken seriously.
I don't give a frick about winning you over (wasn't going to happen anyway) or who you choose to take seriously.
quote:
It's clearly unsatisfactory not only to myself and Tide but to organized conversation in general.
Yeah, how dare I not pretend to be an expert on something
Get the frick out of here with that garbage, Straws.
Posted on 4/10/14 at 9:35 am to TbirdSpur2010
quote:
Which you'll promptly respond that you don't care and we'll get along with our lives with your incomplete response.
quote:
I don't give a frick about winning you over (wasn't going to happen anyway) or who you choose to take seriously.
Such prediction.
Posted on 4/10/14 at 9:37 am to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
No shite.
Posted on 4/10/14 at 9:38 am to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:
incomplete response.
You are an idiot.
Posted on 4/10/14 at 9:39 am to CheeseburgerEddie
quote:
Just to end this argument
Why don't they spend the day or whatever they want to on evolution. And then spend another day or whatever teaching creationism and lumping the major creationist theories together giving a truncated breakdown of the different versions of each. If there is something other than evolution and creationism, that can go next.
What really hurt their cause, or really dismantled it altogether was explained in a Kenneth Miller "debate" (his opponent failed to arrive) where he talked about the trial to teach ID in the classrooms alongside evolution. (Kitzmiller vs. Dover)
Essentially what happened is Creationism was determined to be bunk and so was not cleared to be taught as a science as it shouldn't be. Then, what happened, is the Discovery Institute tried to cheat and slide under the system with Intelligent Design -- which was by and large just a way to slide creationism in without anyone knowing.
Unfortunately, in the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial, they did find out and ID and Creationism have never been the same.
Especially because they tried to lie about it.
Posted on 4/10/14 at 9:40 am to TbirdSpur2010
quote:
You are an idiot.
I consider the source. ;)
Posted on 4/10/14 at 9:41 am to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:
Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District, et al. (400 F. Supp. 2d 707, Docket no. 4cv2688) was the first direct challenge brought in the United States federal courts testing a public school district policy that required the teaching of intelligent design.[1] In October 2004 the Dover Area School District changed its biology teaching curriculum to require that intelligent design be presented as an alternative to evolution theory, and that Of Pandas and People was to be used as a reference book.[2] The plaintiffs successfully argued that intelligent design is a form of creationism, and that the school board policy violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The judge's decision sparked considerable response from both supporters and critics.
Posted on 4/10/14 at 9:41 am to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:
I consider the source.
Then you agree
Page 26 of 49
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News