Mathematician
Reason, and reason again
Because evolution conflicts with certain individual's views, what would be next?
Young-Earth science?
Flat-Earth?
Magik?
Panspermia?
Young-Earth science?
Flat-Earth?
Magik?
Panspermia?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
If ID is allowed in science classes...
- Thread starter Mathematician
- Start date
doppelganger
Through the Looking Glass
"Foundations For Standard Medical Practice: Laying On Of Hands and Psychic Surgery"
"Extracting Confessions from Infidels: A Practicum"
"Physics 101: Your Guardian Angel and You"
"Extracting Confessions from Infidels: A Practicum"
"Physics 101: Your Guardian Angel and You"
BruceDLimber
Well-Known Member
>If ID is allowed in science classes...
A non-issue:
There have already been court cases stating that ID is religion and therefore barred from science curriculums.
End of story.
Peace,
Bruce
A non-issue:
There have already been court cases stating that ID is religion and therefore barred from science curriculums.
End of story.
Peace,
Bruce
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
well you know its only a Theory that germs cause disease... it could still be little deamons. 
wa:do
wa:do
Djamila
Bosnjakinja
It could have some effect on university courses in Europe also.
The Dark Ages, Year III
- France, 496 A.D.
- England, 807 A.D.
- Spain, 918 A.D.
- America, 2006 A.D.
And there may be a few changes to how students are assigned to certain classes.
MEMO to staff
Due to circumstances involving religion and contemporary life in the United States, we have made some ammendments to our guidelines in regard to selecting students for special education classes.
From now on, any students within the regular program identified by staff as being mentally disabled, learning disabled, exhibiting evidence of behavioral programs, or having recently transferred from the U.S.A. will be placed in special education classes.
Thank you.
The Dark Ages, Year III
- France, 496 A.D.
- England, 807 A.D.
- Spain, 918 A.D.
- America, 2006 A.D.
And there may be a few changes to how students are assigned to certain classes.
MEMO to staff
Due to circumstances involving religion and contemporary life in the United States, we have made some ammendments to our guidelines in regard to selecting students for special education classes.
From now on, any students within the regular program identified by staff as being mentally disabled, learning disabled, exhibiting evidence of behavioral programs, or having recently transferred from the U.S.A. will be placed in special education classes.
Thank you.
Terrywoodenpic
Oldest Heretic
Djamila said:
Nice one
Unfortunately it has spread a little wider than that.
we have had to ban it in the UK
Fluffy
A fool
Victor said:
Sorry I was unclear. I meant that Gene seemed to be implying that allowing ID to be taught in science class would mean that other things would be taught in the science class as well and I was arguing that it was not a sufficient reason to disallow the teaching of ID in science class.
Mike182
Flaming Queer
i agree with the seperation - i think that teaching ID in it's many forms should be left to the RE department, and the science should be left to the science department - why confuse the two?
i strongly support ID being tought in schools, i think it is valuable to teach each side of the subject of study - but tought where appropriate.
i strongly support ID being tought in schools, i think it is valuable to teach each side of the subject of study - but tought where appropriate.
I think science implies that it could be disproved (not that it *will* be disproved) but that that ability exists. Despite what ID/creationist think there is much more to evolutionary theory than just Darwin. Also a theory doesn't mean untrue just that it is a complex model. But anyway, the big
problem, imo, is that in no way could ID ever be proven false. Also does any ID person seriously imply a nondeity as a creator, for instance the flying spaghetti monster?
So I would agree with you here.
If you believe that the argument deserves discussion then it goes more into social studies, than science.
--des
problem, imo, is that in no way could ID ever be proven false. Also does any ID person seriously imply a nondeity as a creator, for instance the flying spaghetti monster?
So I would agree with you here.
If you believe that the argument deserves discussion then it goes more into social studies, than science.
--des
Seyorni said:
Agreed, des. ID is not only not falsifiable -- and therefore not within the purview of science -- but it does not describe a mechanism. It just alludes to a Mechanic. It is a "theory" of Who, not how.
In English an unknown and unknowable mechanism of action is defined as "magic."
ID boils down to an assertion that a a very clever and powerful personage created everything by magic.
This is not science.
In English an unknown and unknowable mechanism of action is defined as "magic."
ID boils down to an assertion that a a very clever and powerful personage created everything by magic.
This is not science.
Mike182
Flaming Queer
Seyorni said:
i agree - it is not science, nor did i claim it was.
subject that is tought in schools: origin of the universe:
1) big bang - and all the science and evidence and processes that go with it. this should be tought in science class, by science teachers.
2) creationism - ID. this is not a science it is a belief, and it should be tought in RE classes instead of science - but i still think it should be tought in school.
like i said in my first post, i agree with the seperation.