973beachbum
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:12:13 GMT -5
Posts: 10,501
|
Post by 973beachbum on Sept 2, 2012 19:52:48 GMT -5
Nurses can and do get Doctorates. There are all kinds of Doctors. We call optometrist, podiatrists and chiropractors "doctor". The term doctor doesn't always refer to a medical doctor. Now whose talking down to people? Podiatrists, Optometrist and Chiropractors are all also Drs. Of course a nurse can get a Phd. The question is does a nurse in a hospital with a phd get called dr or nurse.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 7, 2024 14:31:38 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2012 19:54:18 GMT -5
How is that "talking down" I am giving an example of other professions who use the term "Doctor" but aren't what we consider the traditional medical doctor.
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Sept 2, 2012 19:54:53 GMT -5
You are crediting genes with thinking, working, cooperating, manipulating, and designing to create orderly systems. Random blobs don't act randomly to build a super computer. Evolution does not credit genes with these thinking or any conscious/planned design. This is your misunderstanding of evolution. Evolution is random mutations combined with natural selection.
|
|
973beachbum
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:12:13 GMT -5
Posts: 10,501
|
Post by 973beachbum on Sept 2, 2012 20:01:37 GMT -5
How is that "talking down" I am giving an example of other professions who use the term "Doctor" but aren't what we consider the traditional medical doctor. Podiatrists, dentists, ophthalmologists and a whole host of other ones are medical dr's. Someone please explain what it would be like in a hospital where a nurse with a PhD was referred to as Dr. That would have to be really confusing!
|
|
Tiny
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 21:22:34 GMT -5
Posts: 13,369
|
Post by Tiny on Sept 2, 2012 20:08:10 GMT -5
I would imagine that doctors who believe in creationism must also believe in evolution because there are plenty of evolutionary things going on in our bodies all the time. If they believe that God put the cancer there and there was nothing evolutionary about it, why would those doctors treat diseases? Why not just pray for it to go away? I know lots of Doctors and many of them do believe in God and creation. As for "evolution" per se, we are physical beings and there are physical and scientific happenings in our body. But, i am not morphing into a bird. Wow Shooby - sounds like you learned about evolution from a Creationist or a proponent of ID. You are trotting out all the standard fallacies/tactics that I'd expect to hear from the Creationist/ID crowd. You know your 'facts' pretty darn good! I'm sorry you think/understand evolution to mean that you(and the rest of humans alive right now) are somehow 'evolving' into something else. Of course, perhaps you are talking about some other theory of evolution that the rest of us aren't familiar with...
|
|
TD2K
Senior Associate
Once you kill a cow, you gotta make a burger
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 1:19:25 GMT -5
Posts: 10,931
|
Post by TD2K on Sept 2, 2012 21:47:28 GMT -5
They can www.pbs.org/wgbh/aso/databank/entries/do53am.htmlYou started off with very basic compounds and ended up with much more complex molecules. Now, I am NOT saying the molecules 'knew' what they were doing and amino acids are a long way from something being 'alive' but amino acids are the building blocks of proteins.
|
|
NomoreDramaQ1015
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:26:32 GMT -5
Posts: 47,272
|
Post by NomoreDramaQ1015 on Sept 2, 2012 22:12:36 GMT -5
Yes, i did claim that and that is exactly what evolutionists do.
No. No they do not. The universe is random (well unless you want to get knee deep into really advanced physics. lol). No evolutionist assigns thought or intelligence to genes.
Things like "intellgent genes" are designation assigned by the media who have no freaking clue what they are talking about. They are about ratings and getting the layman to tune in.
Genes don't think. They are random complex molecules that are subject to a random complex system of replication. Like anything else, the system occassionally makes a mistake.
Some of these mistakes result in new species, some in extinction and very many of them have no affect at all.
It's all random. There is no thought, there is no design it is all chance.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,525
|
Post by Tennesseer on Sept 2, 2012 22:27:31 GMT -5
Nature is completely indifferent to life.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Sept 2, 2012 22:52:56 GMT -5
Yes, they were peer reviewed by other fellows in the Discovery Institute, a think tank that has registered nearly 200 domain names so it looks like there is lots of proof for ID. Sadly, five minutes time shows the paper is bullshit, since it hinges on that one pesky little item - it requires the existence of an untestable and unprovable GOD. And, that is different from Evolution how? In order to believe in Evolution you are ascribing intelligence to genes instead. You have to assume that genes are able to look ahead and forsee the future and make a value judgement of what will be more advantageous. You want it both ways. There is simply a lot of voodoo in Evolution that you don't want to admit. There is a lot of fuzzy nonsense in Evolution . You're absolutely right. A magic wizard breathed the world and everything in it, into existence. No voodoo or fuzzy nonsense there. Makes perfect sense.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Sept 2, 2012 22:57:20 GMT -5
I would be absolutely appalled if a SCIENCE teacher taught Creationism and/or ID, since the latter two things have absolutely no basis in science. You might as well have science teachers teaching that old cannibal women live in the forest in houses made of licorice and gumdrops. That multiparous senior citizens live in giant ugly shoes.That the only cure for a 100 year coma brought on by a curse can only be remedied by a judicious liplock from the next heir to the throne.
|
|
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 23:27:55 GMT -5
At least that might be amusing to learn
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Sept 2, 2012 23:39:20 GMT -5
Nurses can and do get Doctorates. There are all kinds of Doctors. We call optometrist, podiatrists and chiropractors "doctor". The term doctor doesn't always refer to a medical doctor. Now whose talking down to people? Podiatrists, Optometrist and Chiropractors are all also Drs. Of course a nurse can get a Phd. The question is does a nurse in a hospital with a phd get called dr or nurse. A nurse in a hospital with a Doctor of Nursing Practice degree would be called Doctor, if that's what she wished to be called. Most don't choose to use it, but some do.
|
|
mcsangel2
Junior Member
Joined: Jun 6, 2011 10:53:06 GMT -5
Posts: 224
|
Post by mcsangel2 on Sept 3, 2012 0:02:17 GMT -5
And, that is different from Evolution how? In order to believe in Evolution you are ascribing intelligence to genes instead. You have to assume that genes are able to look ahead and forsee the future and make a value judgement of what will be more advantageous. You want it both ways. There is simply a lot of voodoo in Evolution that you don't want to admit. There is a lot of fuzzy nonsense in Evolution . You're absolutely right. A magic wizard breathed the world and everything in it, into existence. No voodoo or fuzzy nonsense there. Makes perfect sense. [glow=red,2,300] [/glow]
|
|
973beachbum
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:12:13 GMT -5
Posts: 10,501
|
Post by 973beachbum on Sept 3, 2012 7:25:53 GMT -5
Now whose talking down to people? Podiatrists, Optometrist and Chiropractors are all also Drs. Of course a nurse can get a Phd. The question is does a nurse in a hospital with a phd get called dr or nurse. A nurse in a hospital with a Doctor of Nursing Practice degree would be called Doctor, if that's what she wished to be called. Most don't choose to use it, but some do. FYI I meant ophthalmologists. Sorry
|
|
MarleyKeezy78
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 22, 2011 13:20:34 GMT -5
Posts: 3,226
Location: Sittin in the mitten
|
Post by MarleyKeezy78 on Sept 3, 2012 8:08:43 GMT -5
I believe aliens may have helped along the DNA of our ancient ancestors and we are now what we are. As for teaching our 3 yr old, well as he gets older and starts asking about that kind of stuff, we will teach him about all aspects and he can decide for himself. I don't claim to know all the answers and believe what I think is the most logical to me, but always enjoy others point of view ETA: Just a FYI, I was raised in a catholic family and just had to many questions that could not be answered for me.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 7, 2024 14:31:38 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2012 9:07:26 GMT -5
Wow. Thanks for posting this thread, oped. It was eye-opening for me.
I guess I understood that the general public's understanding of science was limited, but I didn't realize how many people were willing to accept ID and creationism as science.
Add me to the list of people who believe in God and evolution. I also believe in Occam's razor - which blows up any time you try to explain away dinosaurs. And I believe that the only time a fully formed man has ever walked out of the ocean is shortly after a fully formed man walked into the ocean.
As far as religious beliefs limiting you professionally, I don't think they are an issue in most fields. However, I don't think you can pursue a career in the sciences without a basic understanding of the scientific method. Accepting ID as a valid theory is a strong hint that you lack said understanding. But not everyone is meant to be a scientist. That's why we have middle management, right?
|
|
NomoreDramaQ1015
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:26:32 GMT -5
Posts: 47,272
|
Post by NomoreDramaQ1015 on Sept 3, 2012 9:37:09 GMT -5
Well the dangerous thing about basic understanding of the scientific method is that it is not that hard to have a basic understanding of it. That is how psuedoscience is able to pass itself off as legitmate, becuase they know just enough to pass the smell test with the general layman.
We need to do a better job of educating people on how science and reserach actually work. Anyone can set up a hypothesis and "test" it and come out with "results" but that doesn't mean they actually accomplished anything. Which is again how ID passes teh sniff test with people, they desig their "studies" to prove what they already consider to be true and since it is circular logic they can just keep spinning the wheel around.
I find fault with the media, our politicians and even science as a whole. We really need to come out of our ivory towers and put more focus on educating people so the Sarah Palins of the world can't come out and make derogatory comments about "fruit fly" research and whenever ID people come along and spout nonsense people are able to think critcally and dissect what these peopel are saying.
Most people know just enough about scientific theory and method to be dangerous. ID, cryptozologists, physicists who believe in ether etc are all able to survive because they know enough to be able to pass their BS off as truth and laypeple do not know enough to be able to separate real science from psuedoscience.
A really good read on the topic is Unscientific America. Book scared the crap out of me. A lot of work needs to be done before we sink back into the dark ages when it comes to the average person's understanding of science.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Sept 3, 2012 12:22:42 GMT -5
Well the dangerous thing about basic understanding of the scientific method is that it is not that hard to have a basic understanding of it. That is how psuedoscience is able to pass itself off as legitmate, becuase they know just enough to pass the smell test with the general layman. We need to do a better job of educating people on how science and reserach actually work. Anyone can set up a hypothesis and "test" it and come out with "results" but that doesn't mean they actually accomplished anything. Which is again how ID passes teh sniff test with people, they desig their "studies" to prove what they already consider to be true and since it is circular logic they can just keep spinning the wheel around. I find fault with the media, our politicians and even science as a whole. We really need to come out of our ivory towers and put more focus on educating people so the Sarah Palins of the world can't come out and make derogatory comments about "fruit fly" research and whenever ID people come along and spout nonsense people are able to think critcally and dissect what these peopel are saying. Most people know just enough about scientific theory and method to be dangerous. ID, cryptozologists, physicists who believe in ether etc are all able to survive because they know enough to be able to pass their BS off as truth and laypeple do not know enough to be able to separate real science from psuedoscience. A really good read on the topic is Unscientific America. Book scared the crap out of me. A lot of work needs to be done before we sink back into the dark ages when it comes to the average person's understanding of science. Very well said, DQ.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 7, 2024 14:31:38 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2012 16:39:27 GMT -5
Glad to help Sarah ... And more K for Drama, as i pop over to amazon to look up unscientfic america... I was actually interested to find that catholics do not have an official position on evolution, their unoffical position is resembles theistic evolution rather than creationism, and according to a Pew study, 58% of catholics believed evolution offers the best explanation for why we are here ... (wasn't sure which thread going that belonged on ) It is very interesting to me to learn about what other people believe.
|
|
Sum Dum Gai
Senior Associate
Joined: Aug 15, 2011 15:39:24 GMT -5
Posts: 19,892
|
Post by Sum Dum Gai on Sept 3, 2012 17:03:22 GMT -5
No, we're not. Genes randomly mutate. Totally randomly. Some of those mutations are good, and help the organism survive better, so they're more likely to procreate and pass those mutations on to their offspring. Some of those mutations are bad. Some of them are monumentally bad. That's why we have genetic diseases that kill kids. Over long periods of time the "good" mutations proliferate through the population because they're that much more advantageous to the species survival, so their offspring outbreed the offspring of the animals without the mutations.
That's it. In a nutshell. There's no plan, there's no purpose, there's just random chance and competition for mates and resources.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Sept 3, 2012 17:13:24 GMT -5
No, we're not. Genes randomly mutate. Totally randomly. Some of those mutations are good, and help the organism survive better, so they're more likely to procreate and pass those mutations on to their offspring. Some of those mutations are bad. Some of them are monumentally bad. That's why we have genetic diseases that kill kids. Over long periods of time the "good" mutations proliferate through the population because they're that much more advantageous to the species survival, so their offspring outbreed the offspring of the animals without the mutations. That's it. In a nutshell. There's no plan, there's no purpose, there's just random chance and competition for mates and resources. Exactly! And that's why the Watchmaker's Analogy doesn't make sense.
|
|
giramomma
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Feb 3, 2011 11:25:27 GMT -5
Posts: 21,357
|
Post by giramomma on Sept 3, 2012 17:16:32 GMT -5
Glad to help Sarah ... And more K for Drama, as i pop over to amazon to look up unscientfic america... I was actually interested to find that catholics do not have an official position on evolution, their unoffical position is resembles theistic evolution rather than creationism, and according to a Pew study, 58% of catholics believed evolution offers the best explanation for why we are here ... (wasn't sure which thread going that belonged on ) It is very interesting to me to learn about what other people believe. l go to (a liberal) Catholic Church. I took a bible study class, and the first thing our nun said was "The bible is a collection of stories from the oral tradition that was written down. The bible is not meant to be taken literally." The kids are also taught how god created the earth in religion, but they are also taught what I consider to be accurate reflections of science. So, yes, I could believe that. But, like I said, our church is really liberal. We even have a LGBT support group.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,525
|
Post by Tennesseer on Sept 3, 2012 17:25:50 GMT -5
I see excommunication in the sister's future. Those rowdy sisters and nuns.
|
|
TD2K
Senior Associate
Once you kill a cow, you gotta make a burger
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 1:19:25 GMT -5
Posts: 10,931
|
Post by TD2K on Sept 3, 2012 17:41:33 GMT -5
I see excommunication in the sister's future. Those rowdy sisters and nuns. To heck with excommunication, burn the heretic at the stake
|
|
TD2K
Senior Associate
Once you kill a cow, you gotta make a burger
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 1:19:25 GMT -5
Posts: 10,931
|
Post by TD2K on Sept 3, 2012 17:42:44 GMT -5
Sorry, I had a mental image of a bunch of genes sitting around the table saying: 1C, 2H, 2S, 2NT ....
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 7, 2024 14:31:38 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2012 18:08:56 GMT -5
Actually, the idea that the bible is the literal word is a very new concept... and mostly held among evangelicals... i think...
|
|
cranberry49
Familiar Member
'Sometimes the simple things are the prettiest'
Joined: Jul 15, 2011 21:09:58 GMT -5
Posts: 734
|
Post by cranberry49 on Sept 3, 2012 18:27:56 GMT -5
Although, there are a few posters on here that I truly respect, I have to disagree with their way of thinking. ;D..So, I truly mean no disrespect when I say the following....KUDOS to Shooby and Virgil!!!! I, too, am a believer in ID. For me, it's the only thing that really makes sense!
|
|
cranberry49
Familiar Member
'Sometimes the simple things are the prettiest'
Joined: Jul 15, 2011 21:09:58 GMT -5
Posts: 734
|
Post by cranberry49 on Sept 3, 2012 18:29:13 GMT -5
Actually, the idea that the bible is the literal word is a very new concept... and mostly held among evangelicals... i think... I'm 53 and I've always believed (been taught) that the bible is to be taken literally. And...I do...
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,334
|
Post by swamp on Sept 3, 2012 18:36:02 GMT -5
Glad to help Sarah ... And more K for Drama, as i pop over to amazon to look up unscientfic america... I was actually interested to find that catholics do not have an official position on evolution, their unoffical position is resembles theistic evolution rather than creationism, and according to a Pew study, 58% of catholics believed evolution offers the best explanation for why we are here ... (wasn't sure which thread going that belonged on ) It is very interesting to me to learn about what other people believe. l go to (a liberal) Catholic Church. I took a bible study class, and the first thing our nun said was "The bible is a collection of stories from the oral tradition that was written down. The bible is not meant to be taken literally." The kids are also taught how god created the earth in religion, but they are also taught what I consider to be accurate reflections of science. So, yes, I could believe that. But, like I said, our church is really liberal. We even have a LGBT support group. I was taught the same thing in Catechism, and I dont think our parish or diocese was or is particularly liberal.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,334
|
Post by swamp on Sept 3, 2012 18:36:27 GMT -5
Actually, the idea that the bible is the literal word is a very new concept... and mostly held among evangelicals... i think... I'm 53 and I've always believed (been taught) that the bible is to be taken literally. And...I do... Whats your religion?
|
|