• 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!

Turkey Will Stop Teaching Evolution in Secondary Schools

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
And what are the outcomes?
Will neglecting the toe affect the scientific progress in Turkey?
I don't see how it couldn't. It's the foundation of all biology, it's what ties all other biological observations together into a cohesive picture, it's what enables predictable results in biology based technologies.

It's like asking weather neglecting reading or arithmetic would affect progress.
 

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
Agree, although in practice, belief in Darwinian evolution is only about 19% in the U.S. (Gallup) despite being taught as fact by many high school teachers & pop science media etc. This tradition of independent free thinking is what made America #1 in science, & is alive and well.
That is a lie - the Gallup poll actually says that 50% overall accept evolution, just that 31% of that are people who believe in theistic evolution. Belief in creationism is around 42%.

mh7klzb21ue_tb0a1h_86q.png

SOURCE: In U.S., 42% Believe Creationist View of Human Origins

What's more, the same Gallup poll shows that there is a direct correlation between levels of education and acceptance of evolutionary theory:

yvoivdxwhusms4bzco2nnq.png

SOURCE: In U.S., 42% Believe Creationist View of Human Origins

And before you argue that "all this means is that people who believe in evolution are more indoctrinated", take a good a look at the top of that table which shows that attendance in Church correlates directly with rejection of evolution.

Finally, the real reason America is #1 in science isn't because of people who reject evolution. That's just silly. It's because of the scientists in America who are hard working, highly educated and know what they are talking about. And 98% of American scientists accept evolution. (SOURCE: For Darwin Day, 6 facts about the evolution debate) Once again, you are simply going to argue that "their reputations" are at stake if they "dare to question the doctrine of evolution", and that's total garbage. You just celebrated America's scientific accomplishments, and you can't then turn around and make-up a massive conspiracy amongst American scientists to hide facts. Either the scientists are competent and free-thinking, as you say, or they are not. The facts, as ever, don't side with you.

By the way, I think Threepwood has me on ignore because I destroyed his argument and exposed him as a liar a few too many times, so if someone could quote this post to him it would be much appreciated.
 
Last edited:

FearGod

Freedom Of Mind
I don't see how it couldn't. It's the foundation of all biology, it's what ties all other biological observations together into a cohesive picture, it's what enables predictable results in biology based technologies.

It's like asking weather neglecting reading or arithmetic would affect progress.

No relation between studying biology and accepting the toe which ignores God.

Turkey didn't cancel biology, but it cancelled that such things happened
due to random mutations, if it makes sense to you then it doesn't for many others
regardless of religion.
 

DavidFirth

Well-Known Member
A "list of transitional fossils" proves nothing but the very vivid imaginations of scientists.

I'm still waiting. What will cats be next besides more cats?
 

Guy Threepwood

Mighty Pirate
It largely depends on age. 73% of those (now - the poll is three years old) 33 or younger accept evolution. After some more Boomers die off, that 19% is going to begin to rise, and perhaps even faster than it ever has in the past.

Denouncing, ridiculing, and dismissing science as unscientific and claiming it is "just a theory" does not make any one person, let alone an entire nation, competent or skilled in science.

Except for people like myself, who believed what they were taught in high school about evolution, along with global cooling and peak oil, but learned more about the subjects later in life..

I don't think I ever ridiculed it, quite the opposite, I was taught I should ridicule any other theory.
 

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
A "list of transitional fossils" proves nothing but the very vivid imaginations of scientists.
It proves that there once lived populations of lifeforms that appear to be transitional forms of extant species, and that evolution's predictions about these forms and where to find them are accurate.

You asked for transitional forms. If you aren't going to accept fossils, what are you going to accept?

I'm still waiting. What will cats be next besides more cats?
As has already been answered, variations of cats. Just like dogs are a variation of gray wolf.
 

Guy Threepwood

Mighty Pirate
I must slightly disagree.....only slightly.
There is actually "creation science" because some do employ real science in their arguments.
Of course, the arguments are typically bogus, but there's some real underlying science (eg, archeology).


But creationism itself isn't science because it's faith based, & lacks testability.

Once again almost verbatim what many atheists said about the primeval atom and mysterious forces beyond classical physics

Steady State, Phrenology, Piltdown man, canals on Mars. were far more scientific apparently

I'm not too concerned about whether a theory is 'scientific', I'm far more interested in whether or not it's actually true!
 

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
Once again almost verbatim what many atheists said about the primeval atom and mysterious forces beyond classical physics
When and where?

Steady State, Phrenology, Piltdown man, canals on Mars. were far more scientific apparently
And what was the name of the process used to determine that they weren't?

I'm not too concerned about whether a theory is 'scientific', I'm far more interested in whether or not it's actually true!
And what is the name given to the method most useful in determining whether or not a claim is true?
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Once again almost verbatim what many atheists said about the primeval atom and mysterious forces beyond classical physics

Steady State, Phrenology, Piltdown man, canals on Mars. were far more scientific apparently

I'm not too concerned about whether a theory is 'scientific', I'm far more interested in whether or not it's actually true!
Science gets to be wrong all the time.
George Box said it's always wrong....merely useful.
But science doesn't claim to have The Truth.
Much of religion does, when it must face error, it really has egg on its face.
 

Guy Threepwood

Mighty Pirate
Science gets to be wrong all the time.
George Box said it's always wrong....merely useful.
But science doesn't claim to have The Truth.
Much of religion does, when it must face error, it really has egg on its face.




“Evolution is a fact. Beyond reasonable doubt, beyond serious doubt, beyond sane, informed, intelligent doubt, beyond doubt evolution is a fact..



I don't claim ID as a fact, I think it's the least improbable explanation best supported by the evidence, and I understand why some believe otherwise

When we acknowledge our own personal beliefs/ faith as such, we understand that other people have their own, this doesn't make them stupid or evil.

But when we claim 'scientific fact', anyone with a different belief then becomes a 'science denier' and hence inherently inferior intellectually- this is historically the most dangerous and deadly belief of all


1194.jpg
It is absolutely safe to say that if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid or insane (or wicked
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
No relation between studying biology and accepting the toe which ignores God.
All science ignores God. Science just can't deal with the supernatural. Anything that can't be perceived, measured or tested is outside the purview of science.

I'm still waiting. What will cats be next besides more cats?
I'm still waiting too.
When will English become non-English? I know there are different dialects, but these are just kinds of English. I know pronunciation and expressions change, but these are just micro changes, they'll never amount to a completely new language.
rolleyes.gif
 

DavidFirth

Well-Known Member
All science ignores God. Science just can't deal with the supernatural. Anything that can't be perceived, measured or tested is outside the purview of science.

I'm still waiting too.
When will English become non-English? I know there are different dialects, but these are just kinds of English. I know pronunciation and expressions change, but these are just micro changes, they'll never amount to a completely new language.
rolleyes.gif

You mean to tell me that scientists are unable to study the DNA of cats and predict what they will become several hundred thousand years from now? I'm totally shocked. I had thought that you had thought you had a good theory. I guess not.
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
You mean to tell me that scientists are unable to study the DNA of cats and predict what they will become several hundred thousand years from now? I'm totally shocked. I had thought that you had thought you had a good theory. I guess not.
Evolution has no end goal. Please explain why/how you think scientists should be able to predict what types of animals cats may branch off to some time in the distant future?
 

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
You mean to tell me that scientists are unable to study the DNA of cats and predict what they will become several hundred thousand years from now? I'm totally shocked. I had thought that you had thought you had a good theory. I guess not.
Why are you ignoring my posts? I'll ask again:

For the sake of argument, let us assume that evolution is absolutely false - all of your points against it are totally true, and evolutionary theory falls apart. Nobody now accepts evolution theory in this hypothetical world we now both inhabit. With that in mind, please answer the following request:

Present ONE TESTABLE prediction of creation theory.
 

DavidFirth

Well-Known Member
Why are you ignoring my posts? I'll ask again:

For the sake of argument, let us assume that evolution is absolutely false - all of your points against it are totally true, and evolutionary theory falls apart. Nobody now accepts evolution theory in this hypothetical world we now both inhabit. With that in mind, please answer the following request:

Present ONE TESTABLE prediction of creation theory.

I should ignore your posts because we have nothing further to discuss.
 

Jose Fly

Fisker of men
A "list of transitional fossils" proves nothing but the very vivid imaginations of scientists.

I'm still waiting. What will cats be next besides more cats?
I wonder.....does David actually think this is a valid reply? Does he truly believe others will see his response as thoughtful, intelligent, and compelling?
 

lostwanderingsoul

Well-Known Member
The United States must immediately declare war on Turkey and bomb them into submission. How dare they decide what should be taught in school. Anyone so ignorant as to even question evolution should be wiped off the earth. All religious ideas must be destroyed and the United States, as leader of the world, should decide everything that other countries do.
 
Top