People in Texas want creationism in textbooks

[zombie]

Now theology, philosphy and etc should have their own class, but creationism does not belong in science unless they have strong factual information to support that theory in which they do not.

advanced sciences run on theory not absolute fact.

Advance sciences must have mandated factual information to back their claims up, it could be 50% right, but the sole idea must be factual backed up and the fine details not so much until they are tested so many times and all the information is computed.

Once upon a time fractals were thought to be junk math and now we know they are sole building blocks of creation and organizing on how shapes look and which give life to 3rd dimensional look.

science cannot test many of its theories so they stay theory. People need to stop treating them as fact. 50% correct is also possibly 50% wrong.

 

[zombie]

creationism is not limited to religion. Church does not have to have anything to do with it

 

[Ajackson17]

Now theology, philosphy and etc should have their own class, but creationism does not belong in science unless they have strong factual information to support that theory in which they do not.

advanced sciences run on theory not absolute fact.

Advance sciences must have mandated factual information to back their claims up, it could be 50% right, but the sole idea must be factual backed up and the fine details not so much until they are tested so many times and all the information is computed.

Once upon a time fractals were thought to be junk math and now we know they are sole building blocks of creation and organizing on how shapes look and which give life to 3rd dimensional look.

science cannot test many of its theories so they stay theory. People need to stop treating them as fact. 50% correct is also possibly 50% wrong.

That's the beauty of science of it's evolution to find the correct factual information and understanding, not staying stagnant, it has to always remain "objective" not "subjective".

How many things have we tested that were suppose to be false in science, turn out "true" and yes there are thousands of different things turned out false, but we don't hover over it, it's old false news and we have the real news.

In a 100 years you wouldn't be able to recongized the technology, science, ideology and etc the changes would be all different. What you thought was not possible in the 21st century could be possible in the 22nd, 23rd, and 24th and so on and so on.

That's the beauty of it all. We are fucking ignorant as hell in this age and I bet you in 20 years from now, they will discover something that will shock the core of human understanding.

 

[jono]

creationism is not limited to religion. Church does not have to have anything to do with it

Nonsense.

 

[zombie]

Now theology, philosphy and etc should have their own class, but creationism does not belong in science unless they have strong factual information to support that theory in which they do not.

advanced sciences run on theory not absolute fact.

Advance sciences must have mandated factual information to back their claims up, it could be 50% right, but the sole idea must be factual backed up and the fine details not so much until they are tested so many times and all the information is computed.

Once upon a time fractals were thought to be junk math and now we know they are sole building blocks of creation and organizing on how shapes look and which give life to 3rd dimensional look.

science cannot test many of its theories so they stay theory. People need to stop treating them as fact. 50% correct is also possibly 50% wrong.

That's the beauty of science of it's evolution to find the correct factual information and understanding, not staying stagnant, it has to always remain "objective" not "subjective".

How many things have we tested that were suppose to be false in science, turn out "true" and yes there are thousands of different things turned out false, but we don't hover over it, it's old false news and we have the real news.

In a 100 years you wouldn't be able to recongized the technology, science, ideology and etc the changes would be all different. What you thought was not possible in the 21st century could be possible in the 22nd, 23rd, and 24th and so on and so on.

That's the beauty of it all. We are fucking ignorant as hell in this age and I bet you in 20 years from now, they will discover something that will shock the core of human understanding.

exactly that's why we should not limit the theories that we teach

 

[zombie]

creationism is not limited to religion. Church does not have to have anything to do with it

Nonsense.

some creationist believe that human life was design by aliens. Some think the universe itself is alive and conscious. religion doesn't have to be connected to creationism

 

[Ajackson17]

Now, I understand what you mean by a creation theory created by a higher power of the universe and the laws of the universe, now that something we cannot prove or disapprove at the moment or if ever.

What they are talking about is a word for word creation theory from the "King James Bible" on how the universe and how life began on earth is from the genesis account.

It's not natural science and its credibility falls flat on it's face due to the fact the earth existed before the freaking sun and stars. That is alone is able to disprove this theory that the earth is star residue from the sun.

 

[Arya Tsaddiq]

I think there should be a class based on critical thinking where all possible therories for the genesis of humans are taught and the students have to decide which they choose to believe. And are graded based on there dialogue, participation, and ability to think critically and provide supporting evidence for the decision they make in a final paper.

Meh. College...okay but not grade schools. Makes no sense to continue perpetuating ignorance in a house of discovery and analytics.

Creationism is based solely on faith and there's no place for teaching "belief". Go to church for that. It's already disproven in science fields.

thats your opinion dawg...

Hence the purpose of the class. U were able to come to that conclusion based on what u have been taught in the past. Instead of beating ideas and theories into the heads of children, allow them to learn more than one idea or concept and come to the conclusion on there own.

They will develop skills not usually honed until college thus being.better prepared.

Creationism being disproven isn't my opinion it's true. Church is for creationism, not a classroom.

Subjective beliefs have no place in an objective environment.

oh ol

 

[Arya Tsaddiq]

*ok

 

[jono]

Now theology, philosphy and etc should have their own class, but creationism does not belong in science unless they have strong factual information to support that theory in which they do not.

advanced sciences run on theory not absolute fact.

Advance sciences must have mandated factual information to back their claims up, it could be 50% right, but the sole idea must be factual backed up and the fine details not so much until they are tested so many times and all the information is computed.

Once upon a time fractals were thought to be junk math and now we know they are sole building blocks of creation and organizing on how shapes look and which give life to 3rd dimensional look.

science cannot test many of its theories so they stay theory. People need to stop treating them as fact. 50% correct is also possibly 50% wrong.

Who tested creationism? Nobody.

Who witnessed it?

Nobody.

Can it be replicated?

No.

Not science.

 

[jono]

creationism is not limited to religion. Church does not have to have anything to do with it

Nonsense.

some creationist believe that human life was design by aliens. Some think the universe itself is alive and conscious. religion doesn't have to be connected to creationism

People can believe whatever they want but there's no evidence. That's what science is based on EVIDENCE. Not some tin-foil hat ideals.

 

[Ajackson17]

I still cannot believe for the life of me, why people are trying to put creationism in science. It does not belong there, but with religions and philosophy.

 

[jono]

I still cannot believe for the life of me, why people are trying to put creationism in science. It does not belong there, but with religions and philosophy.

To dilute it. Less time to explain things that take a great deal of time to understand.

That's why goobers who sum evolution up to "humans came from monkeys" make that mistake and believe that's what evolution is. They don't understand it, won't put the time in to learn it so they take some wildly false general idea of it.

They get to keep their ideas pure as they still keep their houses of pseudoscience open and operating but then intrude on science.

Teach whatever you want in the temple, mosque, Scientology village or whatever but leave the classroom alone.

 

[Ajackson17]

I still cannot believe for the life of me, why people are trying to put creationism in science. It does not belong there, but with religions and philosophy.

this only happens in america as far as i know. i never heard of this shit in canada. stuff like this, the refusal to acknowledge facts and treat them as such, this has seemed to escape the americans. and is one of the main reasons that the rest of the developed world looks at y'all like you are stupid and crazy

no where else do we have politicians disputing things like evolution or climate change. america really is the short bus of the world

Right. It's mind blowing and I mean it's your religious beliefs and all, but you have no factual evidence and the theory of evolution is factual down to the dirty and gritty since it's the theory that has been tested and tried for so long.

I still cannot believe for the life of me, why people are trying to put creationism in science. It does not belong there, but with religions and philosophy.

To dilute it. Less time to explain things that take a great deal of time to understand.

That's why goobers who sum evolution up to "humans came from monkeys" make that mistake and believe that's what evolution is. They don't understand it, won't put the time in to learn it so they take some wildly false general idea of it.

They get to keep their ideas pure as they still keep their houses of pseudoscience open and operating but then intrude on science.

Teach whatever you want in the temple, mosque, Scientology village or whatever but leave the classroom alone.

I know, it goes over everyone's head, but as this world becomes closer and closer, they may not even have you working with them if you do not know science and understand applicable reasoning.

 

[zombie]

creationism is not limited to religion. Church does not have to have anything to do with it

Nonsense.

some creationist believe that human life was design by aliens. Some think the universe itself is alive and conscious. religion doesn't have to be connected to creationism

People can believe whatever they want but there's no evidence. That's what science is based on EVIDENCE. Not some tin-foil hat ideals.

there is no evidence for many scientific theories yet you have no problem teaching them.

 

[zombie]

I still cannot believe for the life of me, why people are trying to put creationism in science. It does not belong there, but with religions and philosophy.

science was born out of philosophy that is why they have always been so close. The various creationist theories are just that theory. And there is no reason why they shpuld not be taught.

 

[Ajackson17]

I still cannot believe for the life of me, why people are trying to put creationism in science. It does not belong there, but with religions and philosophy.

science was born out of philosophy that is why they have always been so close. The various creationist theories are just that theory. And there is no reason why they shpuld not be taught.

But they seperated out of reason and neccessity, that's going through the greek route, technically it came from spirituality but I can see why you would say philosophy as well.

At the same time though, science needed to be seperate entity and it's own thing because they are no longer the same and we have come a long way with the way we view those subjects. Science is no longer philosophy they are two different subjects and very distinct from one another.

 

[zombie]

Science also says there are alternate universes and that the universe and all existence is a hologram. The proof for this is scant

Yet you people have no problem with this

 

[Ajackson17]

Science also says there are alternate universes and that the universe and all existence is a hologram. The proof for this is scant

Yet you people have no problem with this

It doesn't say it has proof of it, that's the point, a scientist has a hypothesis on this, not a theory nor a law. That it is "possible" that alternate universes might exist and that this universe is a hologram might be true. Nothing is theory, fact, or law.

 

[zombie]

I still cannot believe for the life of me, why people are trying to put creationism in science. It does not belong there, but with religions and philosophy.

science was born out of philosophy that is why they have always been so close. The various creationist theories are just that theory. And there is no reason why they shpuld not be taught.

But they seperated out of reason and neccessity, that's going through the greek route, technically it came from spirituality but I can see why you would say philosophy as well.

At the same time though, science needed to be seperate entity and it's own thing because they are no longer the same and we have come a long way with the way we view those subjects. Science is no longer philosophy they are two different subjects and very distinct from one another.

that depends on the science you are talking about.