Loopdilou
Well-Known Member
AKA Mrs. Dark Honor
Joined: Feb 27, 2012 19:41:33 GMT -5
Posts: 1,365
|
Post by Loopdilou on Sept 2, 2012 13:17:33 GMT -5
Please, shooby, tell me you're joking. Otherwise I may have to kill myself.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 7, 2024 21:20:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2012 13:18:36 GMT -5
Goodbye. Nice knowing ya!
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 7, 2024 21:20:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2012 13:19:30 GMT -5
Yes homeschooling situation.
Sorry, i'm confusing people. There are two main homeschooling groups in my area, which offer classes, field trips, support, etc. I help run the "Just Homeschoolers Group". We are secular and inclusive. The other group is "Homeschoolers for Christ". The will not let me register as part of their group. I would not pass the statement of faith required to receive the registration materials.
These two homeschool groups are trying to create an "Academic Co/OP" that holds classes once a week. This is outside registration to either group and thus anyone from either group could join. However, I have not joined, was just receiving feedback from others in my group who had.
I know that this wouldn't fly in most public schools, although i do read now and then about states who would like Creationism and or ID taught in the classroom. I know Kentucky legislature was recently arguing against including evolution in college prep, so I guess that also should tell me it is more prevalent than i first thought ...
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 7, 2024 21:20:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2012 13:19:43 GMT -5
So you never actually took biology either. Um, yes i have. Evolution has become a religion to those subscribe to it. That is why they get so hysterical at any possible challenges to that position. You and me baby we ain't nothing but mammals so let do it like they do on the Discovery Channel
|
|
Loopdilou
Well-Known Member
AKA Mrs. Dark Honor
Joined: Feb 27, 2012 19:41:33 GMT -5
Posts: 1,365
|
Post by Loopdilou on Sept 2, 2012 13:19:51 GMT -5
Last I checked, this "religion" you're speaking of was constantly getting revised in the face of new evidence.
|
|
lurkyloo
Junior Associate
“Time means nothing now,” said Toad. “It is just the thing that happens between snacks.”
Joined: Jan 8, 2011 11:26:56 GMT -5
Posts: 5,601
|
Post by lurkyloo on Sept 2, 2012 13:20:20 GMT -5
Looking at the website shooby listed, I am highly unimpressed. Fifty papers published in journals that span what looks to be 20 or so fields of study, across 26 years, is essentially nothing. I should also note that peer review is far from infallible, particularly in lesser journals, and I see perhaps two journals that I would consider reasonably well respected (J Mol Biol and PLoS One) and none from the top tier (Science, Nature, etc.). Also, most of the support the website claims is in the extended interpretation (sometimes highly questionable interpretation) of the data, not what the data directly show.
ID is NOT a new field--the belief in creationism predates evolution. I also highly doubt it's underfunded. Probably not a darling of NIH (it's quite difficult to get enough scientists to buy into ID research to agree to fund it) but I can't imagine there aren't a number of private foundations happy to fund research that furthers their agenda. Contrast this with epigenetics, which really is a new field ( <10 years old) and has spawned tens of thousands of papers already.
The authors of the website are either really reaching, or in denial. Dogma is a funny thing.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 7, 2024 21:20:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2012 13:20:47 GMT -5
Yes homeschooling situation. Sorry, i'm confusing people. There are two main homeschooling groups in my area, which offer classes, field trips, support, etc. I help run the "Just Homeschoolers Group". We are secular and inclusive. The other group is "Homeschoolers for Christ". The will not let me register as part of their group. I would not pass the statement of faith required to receive the registration materials. These two homeschool groups are trying to create an "Academic Co/OP" that holds classes once a week. This is outside registration to either group and thus anyone from either group could join. However, I have not joined, was just receiving feedback from others in my group who had. I know that this wouldn't fly in most public schools, although i do read now and then about states who would like Creationism and or ID taught in the classroom. I know Kentucky legislature was recently arguing against including evolution in college prep, so I guess that also should tell me it is more prevalent than i first thought ... Interesting, so it is not exactly homeschooling. More like nonpublic, ultra private cooperative learning. Cool.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 7, 2024 21:20:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2012 13:21:28 GMT -5
Last I checked, this "religion" you're speaking of was constantly getting revised in the face of new evidence. To be fair, that is the very basis of science.
|
|
Loopdilou
Well-Known Member
AKA Mrs. Dark Honor
Joined: Feb 27, 2012 19:41:33 GMT -5
Posts: 1,365
|
Post by Loopdilou on Sept 2, 2012 13:21:28 GMT -5
Goodbye. Nice knowing ya! Holy shit. Since I don't actually personally know anyone this ignorant, I have to admit I'm a little shocked how ignorant it really is.
|
|
NomoreDramaQ1015
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:26:32 GMT -5
Posts: 47,273
Member is Online
|
Post by NomoreDramaQ1015 on Sept 2, 2012 13:32:04 GMT -5
nd, that is different from Evolution how
Because evolution is subject to the scientific process by which somethign can be proven or disproven.
If I say gene B creates brown haired people I can design a transgenic mouse model that is missing gene B (it's a lot more complicated than this) and then breed missing gene B mice together, mice that have gene B together and mice that have a missing gene B and a gene B together.
If I am correct then mice without Gene B will not have brown fur. Mice that have one without and one with will have approx 50%, those that have parents who both have Gene B will have brown furred offspring.
To prove that my non-brown mice do not have Gene B expressing I do somethin called PCR which is tangible quantifable evidence.
I do this over many many years and do it the EXACT same way over time. Then I submit my research to a journal that peer reviews my work and questions it.
Anything I do has to be able to be done by someone else. I have to explain in detail the exact steps I did right down to where I got my chemicals and what equiptment I used so in theory anyone else can do it and get the results.
I am also required to provide any research that goes against my theory that I found.
Creationsim is different because you cannot set up a God to create a universer and a godless universe. You cannot test in any size shape or form that god either does or does not exisit.
The whole foundation of it boils down to "Who created teh universe" God. How do you know God created the universe "Because it exists".
That isn't science that is circular logic. There is no room to prove you are right or that you are wrong. I just have to accept you rword as truth.
The fact that you think this is no diffferent than science shows a shocking and pitiful lack of knowledge into how this stuff actually works.
It's the one thing that really worries me about our public school systems. If grown people can throw out and believe the idea that religion and evolution are the exact same thing and both valid "scientific theories" what the fuck are we teaching our kids?
|
|
973beachbum
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:12:13 GMT -5
Posts: 10,501
|
Post by 973beachbum on Sept 2, 2012 13:37:21 GMT -5
"Creationsim is different because you cannot set up a God to create a universer and a godless universe. You cannot test in any size shape or form that god either does or does not exisit.
The whole foundation of it boils down to "Who created teh universe" God. How do you know God created the universe "Because it exists".
That isn't science that is circular logic. There is no room to prove you are right or that you are wrong. I just have to accept you rword as truth.
The fact that you think this is no diffferent than science shows a shocking and pitiful lack of knowledge into how this stuff actually works.
It's the one thing that really worries me about our public school systems. If grown people can throw out and believe the idea that religion and evolution are the exact same thing and both valid "scientific theories" what the fuck are we teaching our kids?" I'm sorry Drama but this cracks me up!
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,534
|
Post by Tennesseer on Sept 2, 2012 13:41:51 GMT -5
The Discovery Institute got busted during Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District, et al trial. They were caught editing out Creationism and inserting Intelligent Design instead into their books so it would hopefully pass the smell test.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 7, 2024 21:20:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2012 13:43:51 GMT -5
"The whole foundation of it boils down to "Who created teh universe" God. How do you know God created the universt "Because it exists" " And THAT is begging the question ...
|
|
|
Post by BeenThere...DoneThat... on Sept 2, 2012 13:46:19 GMT -5
"The whole foundation of it boils down to "Who created teh universe" God. How do you know God created the universt "Because it exists" " And THAT is begging the question ...
|
|
NomoreDramaQ1015
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:26:32 GMT -5
Posts: 47,273
Member is Online
|
Post by NomoreDramaQ1015 on Sept 2, 2012 13:53:08 GMT -5
It is really sad that people can't tell the difference between legitimate science and a psudeoscience.
Psudeosciences are so dangerous because they try to cloak themselves as legimate science. Then actual scientists are the bad guys because we are trying to "protect ourselves" and "not let the truth come out".
No we are doing our jobs, by provin that you are all full of shit and your "science" doesn't hold up to the rigious standards the real stuff has to.
Is science perfect? No it is done by human beings and no human being is perfect/infalible. But it fucking scares me that because of this peopel are willing to take the word of pseudoscientists.
It's what these whackos are counting on and it'll be a sad sad day for the human race when they usurp the scientific community.
So far that has not happened but threads like this make me worry that it is a very real possibility.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Sept 2, 2012 13:55:21 GMT -5
It seems to me there's overwhelming evidence to support some of the major postulates of evolution. The theory is also wholly reconcilable with scripture. It isn't a complete theory by any means. Mathematicians hate it. My preference has always been for schools to teach it as the current state of the art, but emphasize the major holes in the theory. Doing so will kindle mankind's desire to fill the holes. If they're filled, we have a more complete understanding. If they're not, even skeptics may be more compelled to look elsewhere for answers. Although I agree that evolution is of academic interest, I also agree with the posters who argue it has very little practical use. In computer science, evolutionary algorithms (i.e. simulated annealing) and genetic algorithms haven't changed much since the 1960's. Aside from that, evolution is fundamentally useless from a practical standpoint. It won't help a doctor diagnose an illness, or help an engineer to design a better MRI, or help a lab technician operate a gene sequencer. The only field it finds any real application is in ecology (and to an extent, paleoanthropology). But even there its utility is in understanding the ancient past: knowledge qua knowledge. In short, the argument that America is falling behind in science because of a refusal to teach evolution in grade school is specious. American schools do in fact teach evolution in grade school. And even if no American had ever heard of evolution, it wouldn't impact 99.99% of all scientific and engineering progress made in the 20th and 21st centuries. The only reason the theory is so magnified, IMO, is because atheists mistakenly believe that evolution disproves the existence of God. Take that away and it becomes "just another science" that few people care about (between episodes of DWTS and Honey Boo Boo).
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 7, 2024 21:20:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2012 14:01:19 GMT -5
I think in terms of what i was discussing, the inclusion of evolution is part of what goes into determining what is an 'academically rigorous' text/course. The exclusion of evolution seems to be among the criteria for deciding this, in the cases i've looked at in terms of college acceptance.
I worry, not just in terms of evolution, science/psuedoscience, but in genral, about the ability of people to make locial, reasoned arguments, to identify sources for bias and evaluate statements and conclusions.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Sept 2, 2012 14:16:10 GMT -5
I do too, at times.
But I'd bet my right arm that 95% of the people reading this have never proved evolution. Few here have ever run an evolutionary experiment, or read into the subject any more deeply than a cursory understanding of recombination, selection, extinction, etc. or digested anything more than pop science magazine articles over the years.
I'd wager 99% of the people reading this have never read a peer-reviewed article, in its original form, on a topic intersecting evolutionary dynamics.
We believe it because people we trust tell us it's a sound theory, and because we see a large corpus of literature that supports its various postulates. We assume that it's legitimate since the best and the brightest minds, using methodologies we generally approve of, have endorsed it.
And rightly so. None of us have the time to vet the hundreds of scientific discoveries that are now a part of scientific canon.
In terms of going out and getting our hands dirty, 99% of the armchair proponents of evolution are simply parroting conclusions handed to them by other people. This isn't necessarily a bad thing. It's the status quo of how ideas disseminate.
But we're all guilty of bias, and of blindly propagating ideas we have no direct experience with. Bear this in mind before you go too far in criticizing others.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 7, 2024 21:20:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2012 14:21:19 GMT -5
Oh. I know we are all capable of bias. I just think we should be able to identify it, in others and ourselves.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 7, 2024 21:20:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2012 14:30:11 GMT -5
Goodbye. Nice knowing ya! Holy shit. Since I don't actually personally know anyone this ignorant, I have to admit I'm a little shocked how ignorant it really is. Loop I would like you to meet Shooby. You are welcome.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Sept 2, 2012 14:36:03 GMT -5
I would go much further to say that we are not only capable of bias, we are defined by it.
To function in the real world, we must hold at least some basic set of facts to be absolutely true. The idea that physical laws are immutable and generally unchanging, for example. The idea that an experiment should be repeatable in order to be conclusive. Even assumptions as trivial as "I am communicating on a message board with another being whose nature is similar to my own."
None of these are proven assumptions. None are even scientifically provable. They are our preconceptions (our biases) that allow us to function. And I'd argue that the more learned a individual is, the more numerous his/her biases become as he/she crafts a singular worldview.
Indeed in doing so, we sacrifice the ability to think laterally. And IMO, many individuals are nowhere near as open-minded as they "should be" (although this too is an unprovable standard). But bias is inevitably a symptom of wisdom. Or more accurately: one cannot accrue actionable wisdom unless one is also willing to accept the biases that come with it.
That said, I agree with you entirely that we should be aware of our biases, prejudices, and preconceptions, and be able to identify them in others.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Sept 2, 2012 14:44:55 GMT -5
"But if 40% of people don't believe in evolution, or don't know/understand the theory, one would assume it isn't holding them back much. I personally would think that an education should teach evolution to be accredited and acceptable, but it doesn't seem like it is."
I think you're focusing too much on "accreddited." I find it an odd term. Ideas are ideas, facts are facts, theories are theories. I believe in exposing kids (and adults) to a wide variety of each. I do believe in teaching evolution, I don't believe in teaching it to be "accredited" or "acceptable." It's just evolution, it's all subjects. Students should push to ask questions about what they're taught. They should be taught to engage in critical thinking about evolution and other topics. If we teach it as "well, just a fact and "accredited" so don't bother asking questions." I think we're going our kids a big disservice. Science is all about probing what we think we know and finding new theories that better explain the evidence and experimentation.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Sept 2, 2012 15:02:59 GMT -5
Wow DramaQ, you definitely hate ID . If it helps you feel better. I never considered ID. To me science is science, and religion is religion. Theology is a legitimate area of study but they should be kept separate from science. It's good for biologists to seek to disprove evolution with experiments, and to ask questions. What is equally dangerous is to think we "figured it all out" and pack it in and go home. And there's nothing wrong with trying to reconcile your religious belief with scientific evidence. The problem does when you try to convince others to adopt your ideas as proof. For example, I believe natural selection is a sound theory and makes sense, but I do think it's a leap to the say humans evolved from apes. I think humans are unique enough in the animal kingdom that there had to have been something else that made us what we are. Granted apes are intellegent, but humans are on a total plane of intellegence higher. I have a hard time accepting that evolution is the cause of that. Personally, I think the reason is divine, but I'm not going to try and convince others that my view is scientifically accurate, when in fact it's based on faith.
|
|
973beachbum
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:12:13 GMT -5
Posts: 10,501
|
Post by 973beachbum on Sept 2, 2012 15:05:38 GMT -5
Wow DramaQ, you definitely hate ID . If it helps you feel better. I never considered ID. To me science is science, and religion is religion. Theology is a legitimate area of study but they should be kept separate from science. It's good for biologists to seek to disprove evolution with experiments, and to ask questions. What is equally dangerous is to think we "figured it all out" and pack it in and go home. And there's nothing wrong with trying to reconcile your religious belief with scientific evidence. The problem does when you try to convince others to adopt your ideas as proof. For example, I believe natural selection is a sound theory and makes sense, but I do think it's a leap to the say humans evolved from apes. I think humans are unique enough in the animal kingdom that there had to have been something else that made us what we are. Granted apes are intellegent, but humans are on a total plane of intellegence higher. I have a hard time accepting that evolution is the cause of that. Personally, I think the reason is divine, but I'm not going to try and convince others that my view is scientifically accurate, when in fact it's based on faith. That is why I would have no problem with you discussing that belief with my kids.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 7, 2024 21:20:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2012 15:23:32 GMT -5
Goodbye. Nice knowing ya! Holy shit. Since I don't actually personally know anyone this ignorant, I have to admit I'm a little shocked how ignorant it really is. Well, whatever. That is pretty rude. I am a high earning professional with degrees so think what you want. I tend to bring this type of discussion right down to basics. If you disagree fine, but i don't think you have to call me "ignorant" because that I am not.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 7, 2024 21:20:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2012 15:25:51 GMT -5
Sorry, but evolution takes leaps and bounds beyond what it is trying to study. A lot of assumptions are made into the realm of religion and philosophy. Science can explain mechanisms, not those bigger questions that will always remain.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 7, 2024 21:20:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2012 15:31:43 GMT -5
The theory of evolution does NOT say that human beings evolved from apes.
I think Theistic Evolution was what i was talking about when I said belief in both God and Evolution. (which is more accurate than saying creationism and evolution, because 'creationism' seems very specific and not compatible with evolution, while God and evolution are compatible).
|
|
lurkyloo
Junior Associate
“Time means nothing now,” said Toad. “It is just the thing that happens between snacks.”
Joined: Jan 8, 2011 11:26:56 GMT -5
Posts: 5,601
|
Post by lurkyloo on Sept 2, 2012 15:39:53 GMT -5
Karma to DQ for being entertaining, pithy, and spot-on.
|
|
Loopdilou
Well-Known Member
AKA Mrs. Dark Honor
Joined: Feb 27, 2012 19:41:33 GMT -5
Posts: 1,365
|
Post by Loopdilou on Sept 2, 2012 15:59:38 GMT -5
Shooby - you could have a million degrees and make a million a year, but your input into this discussion thus far means that you are completely and utterly ignorant of the very basics of evolutionary theory. You may not be ignorant of other things, but you are of this subject.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 7, 2024 21:20:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2012 16:00:50 GMT -5
Well, then perhaps you only want to preach to the Choir?
|
|