Comments on: Science

By: crazybengal

crazybengal — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 16:07:57 +0000

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/30496_The_Discovery_Institutes_Wedge_Strategy

By: crazybengal

crazybengal — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 15:26:54 +0000

Intelligent Design IS Creationism, repackaged.

By: lonepair

lonepair — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 15:12:59 +0000

We discussed Creationism in my Evolution class at college. There is no empirical data to support it. Something as vaguely based as Creationism, upon the will of a creator, can’t be proven. I guess the one thing that could possibly, although I hate to say it, wind its way into classrooms is Intelligent Design. Its a bit more scientifically based, but again there’s that Creator problem. I’d rather leave religion out of public schools as it seems to have no place in an academic setting.

By: crazybengal

crazybengal — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 04:04:44 +0000

that’s okay.

By: TubbyHubby

TubbyHubby — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 03:58:09 +0000

(Apologies for the poor diction. I don’t know why I put an apostrophe in the word “teacher’s”.)

By: TubbyHubby

TubbyHubby — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 03:46:55 +0000

Whereas in my schools, the teacher’s were aware of the content of the previous Sunday’s sermon. They knew the messages of Vatican II, the various Papal pronouncements, the history of the church and were themselves true belivers in our faith. They were able to take such stands as “Faith is just that – belief without proof. Science requires proof. The more science explains our universe, the more we must marvel at our inability to comprehend such a powereful creator.” In my case, at least, that was a pretty powerful argument that continues to give me joy in both my curiosity and my faith.

By: crazybengal

crazybengal — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 03:37:10 +0000

God was never brought into the school after grade 3. That is when the Lord’s prayer was discontinued in our province. There was no discussion of God ever. And that is the way it should be.

By: Michele

Michele — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 03:26:35 +0000

I attended public schools in the US and we were taught evolution.

To me, creationism = religion and therefore it does not belong in science classes. At most it should be mentioned parenthetically. For example, “We are studying science. Religious texts and teachings may contradict what we learn in this class. Please remember that this is a science class and we will focus on facts and evidence.”

By: TubbyHubby

TubbyHubby — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 03:16:35 +0000

I suppose that’s why I stressed the anecdotal nature of my premise. In my personal experience, much credence was given to the “infallible word of God” nature of the Bible in the homes of my neighborhood. Granted, the neighborhood was an island of Catholicism from many 1st and 2nd generation nationalities in an urban center. The small private schools took great pains to allow us to wrangle with the concepts of dogma and science and reason. The public schools didn’t seem to provide the proper arguments to counter dogmatic teachings, leaving their proponents to merely continue believing the Bible was the only true source of enlightenment.

By: crazybengal

crazybengal — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 02:41:56 +0000

Interestingly, now that I think about it…we were never taught evolution in school…
I picked it up on my own. Read a lot of Gould. Took paleontology in university. Hmmm.