Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Good stuff C-14. Children are natural-born scientists. Neil de Grass Tyson talks about this all the time. Those tendencies should be exploited and encouraged.
I'm not sure if explicitly denigrating religion is necessarily a good thing to do as a parent. What I would rather do is guide my kid, encourage scientific thought, and let her make her own judgments about religion. That's what my parents did.
When you can provide any scientific evidence for your nonsense claim that the earth is 4.5 billion years old or any evidence that proves the theory of evolution, which you claim is a "fact", then get back to us.
I have seen these things explained to you many times...Since you keep repeating the same questions, they are obviously beyond your ability to understand them.
I have seen these things explained to you many times...Since you keep repeating the same questions, they are obviously beyond your ability to understand them.
He trolls every thread on this board. Ignore him and he'll go away.
When you can provide any scientific evidence for your nonsense claim that the earth is 4.5 billion years old or any evidence that proves the theory of evolution, which you claim is a "fact", then get back to us.
If you claim it is nonsense, you should find it really easy to come up with evidence to disprove the age of the earth and the Theory of Evolution then.
Just one little piece of evidence that proves the earth is not older than 4 billion years or a little piece of evidence that refutes the Theory of Evolution.
And Globe, Neil is right, but he's high-profile. I'm not, and going to attack religion. It attacks science, someone has to defend it. Not all kids are going to be as resilient toward religion as you were. Some take the pill and become believers. If you encourage them at a young age that it's a lie, you strengthen them.
Ah, Barbara Cargill is a Perry appointed science adviser. That's f'ing hilarious.
I have seen these things explained to you many times...Since you keep repeating the same questions, they are obviously beyond your ability to understand them.
You have countless evangelicals trying to put ID into science books.
Doesn't Texas now have to teach ID as a hypothesis?
Nothing like spoiling a young mind with pro-jesus (or santa for adults) propaganda.
Idiocracy wasn't a dystopic movie, it was filmed in the future as a documentary.
Listen, it is a show of ignorance to confuse creationism with intelligent design. While creationist may embrace intellegent design theory due to the likelihood that they might regard God as intelligent, the reverse is not universally true. Intelligent Design makes no claim or attempt to identify the nature of the "designer". It simply points out an obvious truth .. that the complex nature of living matter possesses all of the common charateristics indicative of design and purpose.
While the monkey's uncle crowd laments endlessly over the unscientific nature of intelligent design, the truth is quite the opposite. There is no evidence whatsoever regarding the origin of life from a Dawinian perspective, so it remains a mystery as to how life came into existence. ID does not attempt to explain that either ... it simply points out the absurdity in thinking that DNA, created itself by random mixing of raw elements, or that the code inbuilt into the structure, wrote itself.
Listen, it is a show of ignorance to confuse creationism with intelligent design. While creationist may embrace intellegent design theory due to the likelihood that they might regard God as intelligent, the reverse is not universally true. Intelligent Design makes no claim or attempt to identify the nature of the "designer". It simply points out an obvious truth .. that the complex nature of living matter possesses all of the common charateristics indicative of design and purpose.
While the monkey's uncle crowd laments endlessly over the unscientific nature of intelligent design, the truth is quite the opposite. There is no evidence whatsoever regarding the origin of life from a Dawinian perspective, so it remains a mystery as to how life came into existence. ID does not attempt to explain that either ... it simply points out the absurdity in thinking that DNA, created itself by random mixing of raw elements, or that the code inbuilt into the structure, wrote itself.
According to the book Of Pandas and People (the 'textbook' the Dover school board wanted to use in their science classes in 2005), the conjecture of Intelligent Design is:
"that the origin of new organisms is in an immaterial cause: in a blueprint, a plan, a pattern, devised by an intelligent agent" and "a sudden appearance ex nihilo of already intact fish with fins and scales, birds with feathers, beaks, and wings, etc."
Basically, that an "intelligent agent" poofed animals, birds, fish, humans etc into existence already intact at one time out of nothing (sound familiar?).
It doesn't really take much debunking as it doesn't fit the observations at all, it doesn't predict anything, and it's main claim of irreducible complexity has been debunked.
It's not a Scientific Theory or even a scientific hypotheses. It's just religious Creationism with the word God replaced by the phrase "Intelligent Designer".
Last edited by Ceist; 01-07-2014 at 11:46 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
