Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom

Discussion:

Larry C. Lyons

2005-08-02 20:19:57 UTC

From this morning's washington post

washingtonpost.com
Bush: Intelligent Design Should Be Taught
OK that subject line is a bit biased but I noticed this little tidbit
in this morning's Washington Post. He has fits over how well children
are doing in our classrooms (ie., No Child Left Behind), and yet wants
to help guarentee that they will be left behind, at least when it
comes to science instruction.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/02/AR2005080200493.html?sub=AR
and for the link challenged:
http://tinyurl.com/9gg7z

The Associated Press
Tuesday, August 2, 2005; 7:05 AM

WASHINGTON -- President Bush said Monday he believes schools should
discuss "intelligent design" alongside evolution when teaching
students about the creation of life.

During a round-table interview with reporters from five Texas
newspapers, Bush declined to go into detail on his personal views of
the origin of life. But he said students should learn about both
theories, Knight Ridder Newspapers reported.

"I think that part of education is to expose people to different
schools of thought," Bush said. "You're asking me whether or not
people ought to be exposed to different ideas, the answer is yes."

The theory of intelligent design says life on earth is too complex to
have developed through evolution, implying that a higher power must
have had a hand in creation.

Christian conservatives _ a substantial part of Bush's voting base _
have been pushing for the teaching of intelligent design in public
schools. Scientists have rejected the theory as an attempt to force
religion into science education.

On other topics during the group interview, the president:

_Refused to discuss the investigation into whether political aide Karl
Rove or any other White House official leaked a CIA officer's
identity, but he stood behind Rove. "Karl's got my complete
confidence. He's a valuable member of my team," Bush said.

_Said he did not ask Supreme Court nominee John Roberts about his
views on Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that legalized abortion.

_Said he hopes to work with Congress to pass an immigration reform
bill this fall, including provisions for guest workers and enhanced
security along the U.S.-Mexico border.

Bush spoke with reporters from the San Antonio Express-News, the
Houston Chronicle, The Dallas Morning News, the Fort Worth
Star-Telegram and The Austin American-Statesman.
(c) 2005 The Associated Press

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167639
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Nick McClure

2005-08-02 20:30:02 UTC

Permalink

He wants both taught, right? I'm not sure how more info leaves anybody
behind.

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 4:20 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom
From this morning's washington post
washingtonpost.com
Bush: Intelligent Design Should Be Taught
OK that subject line is a bit biased but I noticed this little tidbit
in this morning's Washington Post. He has fits over how well children
are doing in our classrooms (ie., No Child Left Behind), and yet wants
to help guarentee that they will be left behind, at least when it
comes to science instruction.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167642
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Ben Doom

2005-08-02 20:49:09 UTC

Permalink

In that case, let me tell you about my last date.....

--Ben "TMI" Doom

Post by Nick McClure
He wants both taught, right? I'm not sure how more info leaves anybody
behind.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Purchase Dreamweaver with Homesite Plus from House of Fusion, a Macromedia Authorized Affiliate and support the CF community.
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=54

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167650
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Jim Davis

2005-08-02 21:05:11 UTC

Permalink

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 4:30 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom
He wants both taught, right? I'm not sure how more info leaves anybody
behind.

Mostly because most science curriculums are already completely overloaded
and spending time on wishful thinking will just make them more so.

At the very least this could only confuse students since ID tends to ignore
most of the basic scientific principles.

Jim Davis

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167672
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Nick McClure

2005-08-02 21:31:51 UTC

Permalink

Well, ID doesn't so much ignore them, as come out and say the exist because
something else said so.

ID at its basic form claims that there was some sort of thought behind what
was better than one thing, it is considered better to be this or that.

I'm not sure why that doesn't have a place in school. I'm not saying I agree
with the theory, I'm just saying that when the majority of the Country
thinks it is fact, preventing the schools system from teaching it does a
disservice to the students.

If Mom and Dad tell me God created earth and man in his image, but school
tells me this is wrong, what else is school lying to me about?

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 5:05 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom
Mostly because most science curriculums are already completely overloaded
and spending time on wishful thinking will just make them more so.
At the very least this could only confuse students since ID tends to ignore
most of the basic scientific principles.
Jim Davis

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167694
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Jim Davis

2005-08-02 22:01:31 UTC

Permalink

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 5:32 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom
Well, ID doesn't so much ignore them, as come out and say the exist because
something else said so.
ID at its basic form claims that there was some sort of thought behind what
was better than one thing, it is considered better to be this or that.

Where does it say that? I can't find a single, recognized description of ID
that could possibly be used to form curricula. The IDers themselves can't
seem to decide on some major issues:

1) Many IDers are also biblical literalists. They claim, for example, that
the Earth is only some 6,000 years old. Much of the published ID papers
defend this concept by, for example, claiming mechanisms whereby ancient
features like the Grand Canyon could be less than 5,000 years old.

2) In the same tradition much of the geological ID material is based on the
unwavering belief of the great flood. This is assigned blame for everything
from the Grand Canyon to the wearing of the Catskills to the rising of the
Himalayas.

3) Even if ID accepts as fact an ancient Earth it offers no explanations at
all for many observable phenomena. Periodic Mass extinctions, mutations,
punctuated speciation, common ancestry, etc are all not addressed.

4) ID provides no observable predictions. This means that it's nearly
impossible to use ID as a foundational topic for further learning in
science. This isn't a major issue from the perspective of whether it's
"good science" or not but it plays a major role in teaching. A good, solid
understanding of evolution immediately gives a student a leg up in many
aspects of science.

5) ID is not supported by the scientific community as a viable theory. When
creating curricula it's generally a good idea to pay attention to that
area's professional community. In this case however we're seeing more
attention paid to politicians and other lay people.

In general considering ID from a purely scientific, unbiased viewpoint how
could you reasonably place it on even ground with Evolution? ID is, in its
current formulation, perhaps a decade old. Evolutionary theory has been
challenged and tested for well over 100 years.

Why should this upstart, poorly formulated, poorly documented, unwilling to
change theory be given equal footing?

If science class is to make any sense the what's taught in it must adhere to
the (admittedly arbitrary) boundaries set forth.

I'm not sure why that doesn't have a place in school. I'm not saying I agree
with the theory, I'm just saying that when the majority of the Country
thinks it is fact, preventing the schools system from teaching it does a
disservice to the students.

Whoa - stop right there. NOBODY is "preventing" the schools from teaching
it. The stakes here are on approved science curriculum: what gets tested
for on standardized tests.

Schools can teach it if they like.

The problem is that most schools are choosing not to teach it. The
scientific community doesn't support it as a valid, documented theory yet.

All of the trials and cases on this topic have either been to 1) downgrade
the status of Evolutionary theory in the classroom or 2) force the addition
of ID.

Jim Davis

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167705
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Robert Munn

2005-08-03 08:15:52 UTC

Permalink

Religion belongs in churches, temples, and mosques- not in schools. If you want your child to have a religious education, put them in a religious school or home-school them.

As far as ID goes, it isn't a theory in the scientific sense. It is a belief. There is no physical evidence of ID, any more than there is physical evidence that super-aliens inhabit our brains and give us the power to do remarkable things if we can just harness that power. Does that mean we are going to allow discussion of this core belief of Scientology as a credible alternative to evolution? Where does it end? Does that mean we should discuss some people's belief that we were deposited here by aliens for a "mad science" experiment as a serious scientific theory? Show me the evidence, please! That is what scientific inquiry is about.

Either we limit the teaching of the origins of humans to well-defined scientific theory- evolution- or we open the door for discussion of anything at all. That's not to say that evolution is immutable law. It is, after all, still only a scientific theory. If someone produces credible evidence tomorrow that totally debunks evolution, we can take it out of the textbooks. I don't believe that will ever happen, but hey, in science the whole idea is to be a sceptic until your last breath. Sort of the exact opposite of religious belief.

Post by Nick McClure
Well, ID doesn't so much ignore them, as come out and say the exist because
something else said so.
ID at its basic form claims that there was some sort of thought behind what
was better than one thing, it is considered better to be this or that.
I'm not sure why that doesn't have a place in school. I'm not saying I agree
with the theory, I'm just saying that when the majority of the Country
thinks it is fact, preventing the schools system from teaching it does a
disservice to the students.
If Mom and Dad tell me God created earth and man in his image, but school
tells me this is wrong, what else is school lying to me about?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167780
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Matthew Small

2005-08-02 20:35:21 UTC

Permalink

Geez, Larry. You never miss a chance to bash religion. I don't understand
what your beef with this is - he didn't say he wanted to replace the
evolution theory, he just wants Intelligent Design taught alongside it.

Matthew Small

-----Original Message-----
From: Larry C. Lyons [mailto:***@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 4:20 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom

From this morning's washington post

washingtonpost.com
Bush: Intelligent Design Should Be Taught
OK that subject line is a bit biased but I noticed this little tidbit
in this morning's Washington Post. He has fits over how well children
are doing in our classrooms (ie., No Child Left Behind), and yet wants
to help guarentee that they will be left behind, at least when it
comes to science instruction.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/02/AR2005080200
493.html?sub=AR
and for the link challenged:
http://tinyurl.com/9gg7z

The Associated Press
Tuesday, August 2, 2005; 7:05 AM

WASHINGTON -- President Bush said Monday he believes schools should
discuss "intelligent design" alongside evolution when teaching
students about the creation of life.

During a round-table interview with reporters from five Texas
newspapers, Bush declined to go into detail on his personal views of
the origin of life. But he said students should learn about both
theories, Knight Ridder Newspapers reported.

"I think that part of education is to expose people to different
schools of thought," Bush said. "You're asking me whether or not
people ought to be exposed to different ideas, the answer is yes."

The theory of intelligent design says life on earth is too complex to
have developed through evolution, implying that a higher power must
have had a hand in creation.

Christian conservatives _ a substantial part of Bush's voting base _
have been pushing for the teaching of intelligent design in public
schools. Scientists have rejected the theory as an attempt to force
religion into science education.

On other topics during the group interview, the president:

_Refused to discuss the investigation into whether political aide Karl
Rove or any other White House official leaked a CIA officer's
identity, but he stood behind Rove. "Karl's got my complete
confidence. He's a valuable member of my team," Bush said.

_Said he did not ask Supreme Court nominee John Roberts about his
views on Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that legalized abortion.

_Said he hopes to work with Congress to pass an immigration reform
bill this fall, including provisions for guest workers and enhanced
security along the U.S.-Mexico border.

Bush spoke with reporters from the San Antonio Express-News, the
Houston Chronicle, The Dallas Morning News, the Fort Worth
Star-Telegram and The Austin American-Statesman.
(c) 2005 The Associated Press

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Flash for programmers - Flash MX Pro
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=56

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167643
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Kevin Graeme

2005-08-02 20:45:28 UTC

Permalink

Religion shouldn't be taught in public schools.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Get the mailserver that powers this list at
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=17

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167646
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Sam

2005-08-02 20:53:43 UTC

Permalink

Not even as history?

Post by Kevin Graeme
Religion shouldn't be taught in public schools.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Purchase Flash MX Pro from House of Fusion, a Macromedia Authorized Affiliate and support the CF community.
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=57

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167656
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Charlie Griefer

2005-08-02 20:59:20 UTC

Permalink

teaching history says that "people A hated people B because people B
believed in the God of Porcupines while People A believed in the God
of Sticky Things.

You're not teaching the religion. You're teaching about people who
subscribed to the religion.

I'm not particularly religious myself...but I do want my kids to have
a belief in God. I don't expect public schools to instill that belief
tho. Even as a non-practicing Jew, I go to church every Sunday with
my wife and kids (wife is Lutheran, raising the kids Lutheran) because
instilling the belief is my job as a parent...or the job of a
parochial school if we decide not to send the kids to public schools.

Religion is a VERY personal thing and varies greatly from person to
person and does NOT belong in public schools. Maybe various public
school systems should be trying harder to improve the areas they do
teach instead of looking for new areas in which to fail.

Post by Sam
Not even as history?

Post by Kevin Graeme
Religion shouldn't be taught in public schools.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting.
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=11

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167662
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Sam

2005-08-02 21:20:06 UTC

Permalink

So Adam and Eve, Noah The whole Red Sea thing should never be
mentioned in a classroom? How about the Trojan War? Can we mention
Poseidon or Zeus?

I don't think kids should be taught religion in school but it's
important that they're informed about religion to help understand
history and culture.

Post by Charlie Griefer
teaching history says that "people A hated people B because people B
believed in the God of Porcupines while People A believed in the God
of Sticky Things.
You're not teaching the religion. You're teaching about people who
subscribed to the religion.
I'm not particularly religious myself...but I do want my kids to have
a belief in God. I don't expect public schools to instill that belief
tho. Even as a non-practicing Jew, I go to church every Sunday with
my wife and kids (wife is Lutheran, raising the kids Lutheran) because
instilling the belief is my job as a parent...or the job of a
parochial school if we decide not to send the kids to public schools.
Religion is a VERY personal thing and varies greatly from person to
person and does NOT belong in public schools. Maybe various public
school systems should be trying harder to improve the areas they do
teach instead of looking for new areas in which to fail.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167684
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Charlie Griefer

2005-08-02 21:25:51 UTC

Permalink

Post by Sam
So Adam and Eve, Noah The whole Red Sea thing should never be
mentioned in a classroom? How about the Trojan War? Can we mention
Poseidon or Zeus?

anything can be mentioned. it depends upon the context in which it's mentioned.

Post by Sam
I don't think kids should be taught religion in school but it's
important that they're informed about religion to help understand
history and culture.

I agree with this...maybe :)

Yes, in teaching history and culture, you're going to have to mention
religion. But as I said earlier...you're not teaching the
religion...you're teaching about people to subscribed to the religion.

I think Kevin Graeme said it best...and very succinctly... a few messages ago:

"There's a difference in teaching a religious belief of history and
teaching the history of a religion."

Post by Sam

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167688
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Sam

2005-08-02 23:01:12 UTC

Permalink

How do you teach history without explaining what the different beliefs
between the Romans and Jews? How can you even mention Jesus or Mohamed
without explaining the religions?
How can even talk about 9/11 without teaching about Islam and
Christianity? Try to explain to the kids that 9/11 happened because
some Muslims felt... well we can't tell you what they felt without
teaching you about the religion.

Post by Charlie Griefer
"There's a difference in teaching a religious belief of history and
teaching the history of a religion."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167730
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Charlie Griefer

2005-08-02 23:10:57 UTC

Permalink

teaching about the religion in the context of a larger history lesson
is still NOT teaching the religion.

Explaining the differences in religious beliefs between the Romans and
Jews is NOT teaching Judiasm nor is it teaching Christianity.

You're Jewish. Did you go to Hebrew School as a kid? I did. -That-
is teaching religion. It's not in the context of history (altho the
history of the religion was certainly a large part of it). It's in
the context of learning about Judiasm for the explicit purpose of
learning about Judiasm. Would you expect the things you learned in
Hebrew School to be taught in public schools? And I mean to the
degree that they taught them in Hebrew School?

What part of what I'm saying are you disagreeing with, specifically?
I never said religion should not be mentioned in public schools. I
said it should not be taught in public schools. There's a difference
between teaching a religion, and explaining about a religion in the
context of a larger lesson (as I've said a few times already). Help
me out here. What part of what I've said indicates that I don't think
a single word regarding religion should be uttered in a public school
classroom?

Post by Sam
How do you teach history without explaining what the different beliefs
between the Romans and Jews? How can you even mention Jesus or Mohamed
without explaining the religions?
How can even talk about 9/11 without teaching about Islam and
Christianity? Try to explain to the kids that 9/11 happened because
some Muslims felt... well we can't tell you what they felt without
teaching you about the religion.

Post by Charlie Griefer
"There's a difference in teaching a religious belief of history and
teaching the history of a religion."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167733
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Sam

2005-08-02 23:36:21 UTC

Permalink

The thread is about teaching ID and Kevin said, "Religion shouldn't be
taught in public schools."
I'm saying you should be allowed to teach ABOUT religion like
creationism and intelligent design because it's plays into history and
culture.

Just trying to point out the religion in school argument is too vague.

Post by Charlie Griefer
teaching about the religion in the context of a larger history lesson
is still NOT teaching the religion.
Explaining the differences in religious beliefs between the Romans and
Jews is NOT teaching Judiasm nor is it teaching Christianity.
You're Jewish. Did you go to Hebrew School as a kid? I did. -That-
is teaching religion. It's not in the context of history (altho the
history of the religion was certainly a large part of it). It's in
the context of learning about Judiasm for the explicit purpose of
learning about Judiasm. Would you expect the things you learned in
Hebrew School to be taught in public schools? And I mean to the
degree that they taught them in Hebrew School?
What part of what I'm saying are you disagreeing with, specifically?
I never said religion should not be mentioned in public schools. I
said it should not be taught in public schools. There's a difference
between teaching a religion, and explaining about a religion in the
context of a larger lesson (as I've said a few times already). Help
me out here. What part of what I've said indicates that I don't think
a single word regarding religion should be uttered in a public school
classroom?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Sams Teach Yourself Regular Expressions in 10 Minutes by Ben Forta
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=40

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167738
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Marlon Moyer

2005-08-02 23:29:20 UTC

Permalink

How does Christianity play into 9/11? I thought they attacked
America. Is this the new angle the administration is taking? If so,
it'll work well I bet. Nothing could mobilize the U.S. more than
talking about how good Christian people got attacked for their
beliefs. Actually, isn't that the whole history of Christians?

Post by Charlie Griefer
"There's a difference in teaching a religious belief of history and
teaching the history of a religion."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167737
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Sam

2005-08-02 23:41:07 UTC

Permalink

Aren't they the infidels? :)

Hmm, you think I work for the Administration? Nah, you don't think that.

Post by Marlon Moyer
How does Christianity play into 9/11? I thought they attacked
America. Is this the new angle the administration is taking? If so,
it'll work well I bet. Nothing could mobilize the U.S. more than
talking about how good Christian people got attacked for their
beliefs. Actually, isn't that the whole history of Christians?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167740
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Kevin Graeme

2005-08-03 00:47:15 UTC

Permalink

There is a difference between teaching about it and teaching it.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167753
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Sam

2005-08-03 02:02:35 UTC

Permalink

It's a fine line. Is teaching creationism teaching religion? Is
teaching ID teaching religion? If you add, "this is what they believe"
before explaining it, does that mean your teaching about it?

Post by Kevin Graeme
There is a difference between teaching about it and teaching it.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Save $10 Download ZoneAlarm Security Suite
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=66

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167760
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Andrew Scott

2005-08-03 02:15:39 UTC

Permalink

G'Day all,

Hoping to spark some interest in what others are doing.

Here is my scenario; I have a common framework that we use to create backend
administration to all our websites. Currently this system is used for many
forms of logins and at the moment to move forward I needed to look at
concerns regarding privacy laws and the impact it will have on us and our
clients.

What I would like to know is how you people are handling this, I have one
client who demands that they need to know all the passwords to the site, and
I am trying to convince them that it is not a wise thing to let clients /
customers know that the password is known by my client.

What I really need is ammunition to approach management to convince them of
the problem, or even if I am wasting my time on this subject. Now as I said
the common framework needs to look at encrypting these passwords to the site
for future bigger blue chip clients.

Regards
Andrew Scott
Analyst Programmer

CMS Transport Systems
Level 2/33 Bank Street
South Melbourne, Victoria, 3205

Phone: 03 9699 7988 - Fax: 03 9699 7976

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167761
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Gruss Gott

2005-08-03 14:25:41 UTC

Permalink

Post by Sam
It's a fine line. Is teaching creationism teaching religion? Is
teaching ID teaching religion? If you add, "this is what they believe"
before explaining it, does that mean your teaching about it?

ID is on no higher ground than any other un-scientific theory. It
would be appropriate to present its precepts within a class about all
religions, but nowhere else.

That is, if you had a class that taught the major religions: Judism,
Christianity, Islam, Buddism, Hiduism, etc - ID may deserve a half
hour or so to compare to all of the other creation stories.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167813
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Larry C. Lyons

2005-08-03 14:43:24 UTC

Permalink

Creationism is the creation story of one particular branch of the
protestant wing of the Christian religion. If you teach it in public
schools, then the government is endorsing a particular religion. That
is a direct violation of the separation clause.

Moreover which creation story do you want taugh. The Sumerian
creation, which involves the diety having sex with himself (rather
impressive sort of story), various gods, goddesses, daughters and
sons, all in very lurid detail? Basically anything that moved (or
didn't move) was fair game as far as he was concerned.

How about the Aztec, Hindu or Hellenic Greek creation mythos.

By chosing one mythos and teaching it in science classes, you are
endorsing a religion.

As for ID, by postulating a creator, then that pushes the theory, I
call it such only in its most venacular sense, over to a religious
belief, again violating the first amendment. As for being a scientific
theory, that's been gone over multiple times. It simply is not.

If you want your kid to learn creation myths as scientific theory, you
can teach that to your own kids, why should I have to pay for
another's religious beliefs?

Post by Gruss Gott

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167829
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Howie Hamlin

2005-08-02 21:49:12 UTC

Permalink

--- On Tuesday, August 02, 2005 5:20 PM, Sam scribed: ---

Post by Sam
So Adam and Eve, Noah The whole Red Sea thing should never be
mentioned in a classroom? How about the Trojan War? Can we mention
Poseidon or Zeus?

These are already taught as "mythology" - I doubt that Bush wants creationism taught as mythology...

Post by Sam
I don't think kids should be taught religion in school but it's
important that they're informed about religion to help understand
history and culture.

I agree - especially since religion bred a lot of strife and wars that are directly related to major event in history...

Howie

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167700
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Sam

2005-08-02 23:04:46 UTC

Permalink

I was a side response to Kevin saying religion should not be taught in
school at all

Post by Howie Hamlin
These are already taught as "mythology" - I doubt that Bush wants creationism taught as mythology...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167731
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Jim Davis

2005-08-02 21:31:40 UTC

Permalink

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 5:20 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom
So Adam and Eve, Noah The whole Red Sea thing should never be
mentioned in a classroom? How about the Trojan War? Can we mention
Poseidon or Zeus?

Well... not a science classroom. ;^)

I don't think kids should be taught religion in school but it's
important that they're informed about religion to help understand
history and culture.

I would agree. I'm keeping my comments pretty specific to science curricula
however. I wouldn't mind at all comparative religion as a subject taught in
school. But it's not science.

I'm an atheist and so it's likely that my kids with be atheists. But I know
of no atheists that find religion useless. At the very least the lessons
taught are valuable.

You can't learn history well without learning about some religious beliefs.
Just as you can learn science well without a firm understanding of the
scientific method.

There are many places for religion (not A religion) in the classroom. But
only very rarely in science.

Jim Davis

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167777
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Matthew Small

2005-08-02 21:02:46 UTC

Permalink

How about as a theory that does not mention Jesus Christ, Allah, Budda or
Loki? If we're talking about science, it is, another theory of how life
developed on Earth, regardless of whether or not you choose to believe it.

Put another way, it should be either all or none. The teaching of evolution
directly conflicts with many, if not most, religious explanations. To teach
only evolution would be in effect a religious/anti-religious movement
(atheism?) which serves to undermine the religious teachings that the parent
conveys onto the child.

Further, even if you consider this purely religion, rather than science, the
Constitution says that no prohibition to practice religion will be condoned.
That part of the Constitution is usually forgotten in the effort to atheize
(my new word) the US.

Matthew Small

-----Original Message-----
From: Sam [mailto:***@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 4:54 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom

Not even as history?

Post by Kevin Graeme
Religion shouldn't be taught in public schools.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Purchase Captivate from House of Fusion, a Macromedia Authorized Affiliate and support the CF community.
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=52

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167668
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Kevin Graeme

2005-08-02 21:14:49 UTC

Permalink

How many times have we had this discussion?

Post by Matthew Small
How about as a theory that does not mention Jesus Christ, Allah, Budda or
Loki? If we're talking about science, it is, another theory of how life
developed on Earth, regardless of whether or not you choose to believe it.
Put another way, it should be either all or none. The teaching of evolution
directly conflicts with many, if not most, religious explanations. To teach
only evolution would be in effect a religious/anti-religious movement
(atheism?) which serves to undermine the religious teachings that the parent
conveys onto the child.
Further, even if you consider this purely religion, rather than science, the
Constitution says that no prohibition to practice religion will be condoned.
That part of the Constitution is usually forgotten in the effort to atheize
(my new word) the US.
Matthew Small
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 4:54 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom
Not even as history?

Post by Kevin Graeme
Religion shouldn't be taught in public schools.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167680
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Jim Davis

2005-08-02 21:22:52 UTC

Permalink

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 5:15 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom
How many times have we had this discussion?

Um.... that many plus at least this one. ;^)

Jim Davis

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167686
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Matthew Small

2005-08-03 11:18:47 UTC

Permalink

Agreed, which brought up my original response.

Matthew Small

-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Graeme [mailto:***@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 5:15 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom

How many times have we had this discussion?

Post by Kevin Graeme
Religion shouldn't be taught in public schools.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Purchase Homesite Plus with Dreamweaver from House of Fusion, a Macromedia Authorized Affiliate and support the CF community.
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=55

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167786
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Kevin Graeme

2005-08-03 15:08:26 UTC

Permalink

Well it's a pretty fundamental issue as far as science education goes,
but I guess if we haven't convinced people on this list that it
shouldn't be taught in school, after LOTS of threads on the topic,
then I think it's a lost cause with the larger public.

-Kevin

Post by Matthew Small
Agreed, which brought up my original response.
Matthew Small
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 5:15 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom
How many times have we had this discussion?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167837
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Jim Davis

2005-08-02 21:21:19 UTC

Permalink

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 5:03 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom
How about as a theory that does not mention Jesus Christ, Allah, Budda or
Loki? If we're talking about science, it is, another theory of how life
developed on Earth, regardless of whether or not you choose to believe it.

But it simply isn't that.

If you teach it as science then it must adhere to scientific principles. It
doesn't.

1) There are no tests which can be constructed to test the hypothesis.

2) The hypothesis makes no predictions about future observations which could
be cataloged.

3) The hypothesis begins with a desired outcome and selects data which seem
to support it (but doesn't).

In short ID says "here are examples of things that couldn't possibly arise
from chance" and then assigns a nebulous intelligent designer to them. It
poses no mechanisms, no ramifications and no qualifications.

Every major argument posed by IDers has been successfully challenged by
evolutionary theory.

This doesn't, of course, "prove" evolution. It simply shows that the
extreme of demanding a designer isn't required by the observable phenomenon.

Put another way, it should be either all or none. The teaching of evolution
directly conflicts with many, if not most, religious explanations. To teach
only evolution would be in effect a religious/anti-religious movement
(atheism?) which serves to undermine the religious teachings that the parent
conveys onto the child.

There is no real reason to consider the teaching of evolution as
anti-religious. Science it about studying what you can see and test: its
conclusions are fundamentally natural. Religion is about trusting in what
you can't see or test. Its conclusions are fundamentally supernatural.

Further, even if you consider this purely religion, rather than science, the
Constitution says that no prohibition to practice religion will be condoned.
That part of the Constitution is usually forgotten in the effort to atheize
(my new word) the US.

Teaching only science in science classes is hardly a prohibition to practice
religion.

Jim Davis

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167685
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Jerry Johnson

2005-08-02 23:38:25 UTC

Permalink

Then we shouldn't teach gravity, or that the heart circulates blood,
or BATHING or that the Earth is not flat and revolves around the sun,
since all of these have been strictly held anti-beliefs of
Christianity.

If you are going to include "intelligent design", then you need to
include the earth as turtle, L Ron's mumbo-jumbo, and all of the other
creation-myths out there.

If "intelligent design" ever achieves real recognition as a scientific
theory, it WILL get taught. But right now it is a fringe theory,
without any credence by accredited, reknowned scientists.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how to get a fax number that sends and receives faxes using your current email address
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=64

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167739
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Sam

2005-08-02 23:47:28 UTC

Permalink

I think it's important to teach that, it'll help our kids understand
that Tom Cruise and John Trovalta ain't right in the head :)

Post by Jerry Johnson
If you are going to include "intelligent design", then you need to
include the earth as turtle, L Ron's mumbo-jumbo, and all of the other
creation-myths out there.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167742
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Jerry Johnson

2005-08-03 00:02:09 UTC

Permalink

Maybe ID should be taught as a lesson in applying scientific
principles to a theory. By this measure, wouldn't it be debunked
fairly quickly as a theory? I wonder if this is a possibility thought
of by the proponents of ID?

As for religion being taught in the schools, I think comparative
religion classes should be mandatory. Knowing the ins-and-outs of
religions, cultures and societies is an important social tool, IMHO.
Organized religions spend a lot of time explaining why "Our Way" is
the only right way. A little more understanding of how close the
others have it might go a long way towards a kinder, gentler nation.

For example, the information I have gained on these lists about
Judaism and Catholicism have been very enlightening.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167743
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Jim Davis

2005-08-03 00:05:00 UTC

Permalink

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 7:38 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom
Then we shouldn't teach gravity, or that the heart circulates blood,
or BATHING or that the Earth is not flat and revolves around the sun,
since all of these have been strictly held anti-beliefs of
Christianity.
If you are going to include "intelligent design", then you need to
include the earth as turtle, L Ron's mumbo-jumbo, and all of the other
creation-myths out there.

Sort of - ID, in and of itself, is not "bad" - it's definitely more
scientific that "Earth as a Turtle". ;^)

ID could very well become the preferred scientific explanation: if it meets
scientific standards (which it doesn't now). Science has no problem
supplanting one theory with another if the new theory explains things better
- especially if the new theory is simpler and has less baggage.

But ID just isn't there. It may never get there (in my opinion it never
will with the proponents it has now) but science doesn't even close the door
on the possibility.

If "intelligent design" ever achieves real recognition as a scientific
theory, it WILL get taught. But right now it is a fringe theory,
without any credence by accredited, reknowned scientists.

This is what I'm talking about.

Jim Davis

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167744
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Larry C. Lyons

2005-08-03 00:42:58 UTC

Permalink

So in that case, speaking as Pope, the late John Paul's encyclical on
evolution was incorrect? It concluded that there was evolution and the
teachings of the Catholic Church were not in conflict. Same with the
Episcopalian and most other protestant churches. Only the evangelical
churches that follow a prescript of biblical literalism or other
fundimentalist belief object to the scientific theory of evolution
being taught in science classes.

I am all for competing theories being taught in science classes.
Provided the following: the competing theory fit within the same
criteria as any scientific theory; It explains the available data more
adequately than the current theories and is testable.

Only the theory of evolution fit all these criteria. Creationism fails
on all of them and Intelligent Design fails on all as well.

I have no objection to your practicing religion in its proper place.
By wanting to practice it in the school, gives a government stamp of
approval to that religious belief. That directly violates the
separation clause.

larry

Post by Kevin Graeme
Religion shouldn't be taught in public schools.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167752
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Kevin Graeme

2005-08-02 21:11:36 UTC

Permalink

There's a difference in teaching a religious belief of history and
teaching the history of a religion.

-Kevin

Post by Sam
Not even as history?

Post by Kevin Graeme
Religion shouldn't be taught in public schools.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167678
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Gruss Gott

2005-08-02 21:31:36 UTC

Permalink

Post by Sam
Not even as history?

Religion is not history and many of the Biblical stories are not
documented history, but just stories.

I could see having a literature class that examined the Bible, Koran,
etc as literature, but not cover any of the religion behind it.

Also Intelligent Design should not be taught anywhere as it's not part
of any academic discipline. That is, it's not science or biology or
chemistry or literature, etc.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167776
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Jim Davis

2005-08-02 21:07:05 UTC

Permalink

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 4:45 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom
Religion shouldn't be taught in public schools.

While I agree (I think) with the statement in science classes I found
comparative religions one of the more useful classes in school.

It was a non-mandatory elective (and I think it should be), but in general a
very good class.

Jim Davis

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167674
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Larry C. Lyons

2005-08-03 00:33:28 UTC

Permalink

I have nothing against religion or believers, except those who want
their particular belief set taught in science classes. I have no
problem with creation stories being taught in comparative religion or
history classes, as long as all such stories are taught. Let the kids
learn about how the Summerians and Babylonians viewed creation. Or how
the Inuit creation story has similarities to the Lapps of northern
Finland.

ID has nothing to do with science, its just another form of
creationism - very much like an old hooker in new clothing.

larry

Post by Matthew Small
Geez, Larry. You never miss a chance to bash religion. I don't understand
what your beef with this is - he didn't say he wanted to replace the
evolution theory, he just wants Intelligent Design taught alongside it.
Matthew Small
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 4:20 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom
From this morning's washington post
washingtonpost.com
Bush: Intelligent Design Should Be Taught
OK that subject line is a bit biased but I noticed this little tidbit
in this morning's Washington Post. He has fits over how well children
are doing in our classrooms (ie., No Child Left Behind), and yet wants
to help guarentee that they will be left behind, at least when it
comes to science instruction.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/02/AR2005080200
493.html?sub=AR
http://tinyurl.com/9gg7z
The Associated Press
Tuesday, August 2, 2005; 7:05 AM
WASHINGTON -- President Bush said Monday he believes schools should
discuss "intelligent design" alongside evolution when teaching
students about the creation of life.
During a round-table interview with reporters from five Texas
newspapers, Bush declined to go into detail on his personal views of
the origin of life. But he said students should learn about both
theories, Knight Ridder Newspapers reported.
"I think that part of education is to expose people to different
schools of thought," Bush said. "You're asking me whether or not
people ought to be exposed to different ideas, the answer is yes."
The theory of intelligent design says life on earth is too complex to
have developed through evolution, implying that a higher power must
have had a hand in creation.
Christian conservatives _ a substantial part of Bush's voting base _
have been pushing for the teaching of intelligent design in public
schools. Scientists have rejected the theory as an attempt to force
religion into science education.
_Refused to discuss the investigation into whether political aide Karl
Rove or any other White House official leaked a CIA officer's
identity, but he stood behind Rove. "Karl's got my complete
confidence. He's a valuable member of my team," Bush said.
_Said he did not ask Supreme Court nominee John Roberts about his
views on Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that legalized abortion.
_Said he hopes to work with Congress to pass an immigration reform
bill this fall, including provisions for guest workers and enhanced
security along the U.S.-Mexico border.
Bush spoke with reporters from the San Antonio Express-News, the
Houston Chronicle, The Dallas Morning News, the Fort Worth
Star-Telegram and The Austin American-Statesman.
(c) 2005 The Associated Press

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167747
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

SStewart

2005-08-02 20:49:06 UTC

Permalink

I don't see where Larry's bashing religion...

I don't see how one brand of religion can be interjected into a *public* school system. If we are teaching religion in public schools should we not be teaching *all* religions, not just the brand that the current president's handlers preach.

This is where it gets sticky, if you start teaching "neo-con" Christianity in public schools, then you're going to have the Jewish, Moslems, Mormons, Buddhists, non- neocon Christians, Atheists, Wiccans, and every other group saying "why aren't our views taught?"

If you want your kids to learn "Intelligent Design" then find a private school that teaches what you want your kids to learn.

This, Ladies and Gentlemen one of the reasons that "Separation of Church and State" was created.

Scott A. Stewart,
Web Application Developer

Engineering Consulting Services, Ltd. (ECS)
14026 Thunderbolt Place, Suite 300
Chantilly, VA 20151
Phone: (703) 995-1737
Fax: (703) 834-5527

"Many thousands of years ago, a blue faced Pict stepped on a bloated sheep carcass... and thus the Pipes were born"

.... the Scottish Rogues

-----Original Message-----
From: Matthew Small [mailto:***@amcity.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 04:35 pm
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom
Importance: Low

Geez, Larry. You never miss a chance to bash religion. I don't understand
what your beef with this is - he didn't say he wanted to replace the
evolution theory, he just wants Intelligent Design taught alongside it.

Matthew Small
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.7/60 - Release Date: 07/28/2005

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167649
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Marlon Moyer

2005-08-02 21:03:19 UTC

Permalink

I really don't mind it being taught in schools as long as they put it
in context correctly. Something like:

"The theory of Evolution hypothesizes that given certain conditions
species with change and adapt. Consequently, the most successful
adaptations will prosper will the other's may die out.......etc.

If this theory scares you, uses too many big words, or you just don't
like to think that you are in charge of your own destiny, you may like
to believe in something called Intelligent Design. It makes things
easy by saying "God did it". Also, don't worry, the big yellow disc
in the sky is really just a big lightbulb and every night God changes
it out."

From this morning's washington post
washingtonpost.com
Bush: Intelligent Design Should Be Taught
OK that subject line is a bit biased but I noticed this little tidbit
in this morning's Washington Post. He has fits over how well children
are doing in our classrooms (ie., No Child Left Behind), and yet wants
to help guarentee that they will be left behind, at least when it
comes to science instruction.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/02/AR2005080200493.html?sub=AR
http://tinyurl.com/9gg7z
The Associated Press
Tuesday, August 2, 2005; 7:05 AM
WASHINGTON -- President Bush said Monday he believes schools should
discuss "intelligent design" alongside evolution when teaching
students about the creation of life.
During a round-table interview with reporters from five Texas
newspapers, Bush declined to go into detail on his personal views of
the origin of life. But he said students should learn about both
theories, Knight Ridder Newspapers reported.
"I think that part of education is to expose people to different
schools of thought," Bush said. "You're asking me whether or not
people ought to be exposed to different ideas, the answer is yes."
The theory of intelligent design says life on earth is too complex to
have developed through evolution, implying that a higher power must
have had a hand in creation.
Christian conservatives _ a substantial part of Bush's voting base _
have been pushing for the teaching of intelligent design in public
schools. Scientists have rejected the theory as an attempt to force
religion into science education.
_Refused to discuss the investigation into whether political aide Karl
Rove or any other White House official leaked a CIA officer's
identity, but he stood behind Rove. "Karl's got my complete
confidence. He's a valuable member of my team," Bush said.
_Said he did not ask Supreme Court nominee John Roberts about his
views on Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that legalized abortion.
_Said he hopes to work with Congress to pass an immigration reform
bill this fall, including provisions for guest workers and enhanced
security along the U.S.-Mexico border.
Bush spoke with reporters from the San Antonio Express-News, the
Houston Chronicle, The Dallas Morning News, the Fort Worth
Star-Telegram and The Austin American-Statesman.
(c) 2005 The Associated Press

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167669
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Judith Dinowitz

2005-08-02 22:24:43 UTC

Permalink

That's really quite unfair, Marlon. Saying that God's in charge does not mean you're not in charge of your own destiny, nor that you're scared of the theory of evolution.

Your arguments show your anti-religious bias.

Judith
----- Original Message -----

Post by Marlon Moyer
I really don't mind it being taught in schools as long as they put it
"The theory of Evolution hypothesizes that given certain conditions
species with change and adapt. Consequently, the most successful
adaptations will prosper will the other's may die out.......etc.
If this theory scares you, uses too many big words, or you just don't
like to think that you are in charge of your own destiny, you may like
to believe in something called Intelligent Design. It makes things
easy by saying "God did it". Also, don't worry, the big yellow disc
in the sky is really just a big lightbulb and every night God changes
it out."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting.
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=11

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167714
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Marlon Moyer

2005-08-02 23:17:33 UTC

Permalink

You're right. It is unfair. It's just that the older I grow, the
more I see the evil side of religion. In my teen years I didn't have
a use for religion. In my late 20's I thought I had figured out how
to overlook it and let people do what they want. Then the 2000
election came along and I saw how scary the religious right had
become. Nowadays, there are times when I can't tell that much
difference between the religious right and the Islamic extremists.

At a time when you'd think the general public would look at Islamic
governments and say "Whoa, they have too much religion in their
government", it seems we're trying to do the same thing but with a
different religion. Seriously, in the middle of a "war", why did we
have this big deal about gay marriage. Was it that serious of a
problem?

Marlon

Post by Judith Dinowitz
That's really quite unfair, Marlon. Saying that God's in charge does not mean you're not in charge of your own destiny, nor that you're scared of the theory of evolution.
Your arguments show your anti-religious bias.
Judith
----- Original Message -----

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167735
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Judith Dinowitz

2005-08-03 03:01:12 UTC

Permalink

Nowadays, there are times when I can't tell that much

Post by Marlon Moyer
difference between the religious right and the Islamic extremists.
At a time when you'd think the general public would look at Islamic
governments and say "Whoa, they have too much religion in their
government", it seems we're trying to do the same thing but with a
different religion. Seriously, in the middle of a "war", why did we
have this big deal about gay marriage. Was it that serious of a
problem?

Not really, when you put it up against the fact that we're in the middle of a war and winning that war should be our priority.

But this is an issue that strikes deeply at the question of the morality of our society. The idea of giving gays full rights in marriage means that we are accepting the idea of the gay life as just another "lifestyle" and making that acceptance official. This trickles down. To religious people (such as myself), a gay lifestyle is a tremendous sin. Making a gay marriage legal basically gives public approval to the idea of being gay. You can't expect to try to push that through and not have religious people oppose it.

On the other hand, I don't think you'll find religious Christians in this country protesting such a motion by blowing up a pizza parlor or a subway station. That's where you have the difference, Marlon.

Judith

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167767
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Marlon Moyer

2005-08-03 03:24:23 UTC

Permalink

Give it time. They already bomb abortion clinics and shoot doctors.
Pizza places aren't far away.

I'm sure the same argument is used in Islamic countries when they're
debating giving women the same rights as men. That's the thing that
cracks me up about religion. Growing up catholic, I was taught that
my religion was right and pretty much everyone else was wrong.
Ironically, it seems that EVERY religion teaches that. Your beliefs
hold that gays marrying is wrong. A lot of Islamic countries don't
believe women should be in government. What's so different about
those two beliefs? Yet we chastize them because their beliefs aren't
ours.

I watched an interview with Sen. Santorum. I really think the guy
believes what he is saying. To me he sounds about as extremist as
some of those were fighting. That scares the crap out of me since
there's rumors he'll run in 2008.

Post by Marlon Moyer
Nowadays, there are times when I can't tell that much

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Protect Your PC from viruses, hackers, spam and more. Buy PC-cillin with Easy Installation & Support
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=61

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167769
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Howie Hamlin

2005-08-03 13:34:42 UTC

Permalink

--- On Tuesday, August 02, 2005 11:24 PM, Marlon Moyer scribed: ---

Post by Marlon Moyer
Give it time. They already bomb abortion clinics and shoot doctors.
Pizza places aren't far away.
I'm sure the same argument is used in Islamic countries when they're
debating giving women the same rights as men. That's the thing that
cracks me up about religion. Growing up catholic, I was taught that
my religion was right and pretty much everyone else was wrong.

Yep - I experienced the same thing. And, I agree, it's likely an underlying tenet in most religions.

Post by Marlon Moyer
Ironically, it seems that EVERY religion teaches that. Your beliefs
hold that gays marrying is wrong. A lot of Islamic countries don't
believe women should be in government. What's so different about
those two beliefs? Yet we chastize them because their beliefs aren't
ours.

Well, true but I would imagine that the women in Islamic countries do not all believe the same thing as the men...I'm sure that most of them would want to vote, drive a car, etc.

Post by Marlon Moyer
I watched an interview with Sen. Santorum. I really think the guy
believes what he is saying. To me he sounds about as extremist as
some of those were fighting. That scares the crap out of me since
there's rumors he'll run in 2008.

Santorum has about as much of a chance of winning the precidency as Saddam Hussein <g>. Seriously, the guy is looney. I've seen him speak his mind and, although I think that he's an intelligent person, his root beliefs are too radical.

Howie

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167803
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Marlon Moyer

2005-08-03 14:09:19 UTC

Permalink

Post by Howie Hamlin

Well, true but I would imagine that the women in Islamic countries do not all believe the same thing as the men...I'm sure that most of them would want to vote, drive a car, etc.

True, but don't you think that most gay and lesbian people also feel that way?

Post by Howie Hamlin

I hope so, but if the country starts to sway more that way, his
beliefs suddenly become not so radical.

Post by Howie Hamlin
Howie

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167810
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Howie Hamlin

2005-08-03 14:28:39 UTC

Permalink

I saw Joe Biden on The Daily Show yesterday and he is actively working on a possible run for President in 2008. He also wants John McCain to be his running mate - interesting but McCain has stated over and over again that he would not run with a non-Republican.

Anyway - my only point in bringing this up is that, hopefully, there will be enough good choices in '08 and that we won't have to worry about Rick Sanitorium....oops...I mean "Santorum" <g>

--- On Wednesday, August 03, 2005 10:09 AM, Marlon Moyer scribed: ---

Post by Marlon Moyer

Post by Howie Hamlin
Santorum has about as much of a chance of winning the precidency as
Saddam Hussein <g>. Seriously, the guy is looney. I've seen him
speak his mind and, although I think that he's an intelligent
person, his root beliefs are too radical.

I hope so, but if the country starts to sway more that way, his
beliefs suddenly become not so radical.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Flash for programmers - Flash MX Pro
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=56

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167816
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Jerry Johnson

2005-08-03 05:28:17 UTC

Permalink

You mean like blowing up clinics, gay bars and the Olympics? Like
shooting doctors in their homes?

Nope. Christians would never do that in the name of their faith.

Post by Judith Dinowitz
On the other hand, I don't think you'll find religious Christians in this country protesting such a motion by blowing up a pizza parlor or a subway station. That's where you have the difference, Marlon.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167775
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Ian Skinner

2005-08-02 21:14:01 UTC

Permalink

"The teaching of evolution directly conflicts with many, if not most, religious explanations."

Actually it doesn't if one actually looks at how limited the theroy is. It more or less boils down to "life on earth changes."

Unless you subscribe to the idea that all life on earth has been here as it is since the beginning without changing. And I would wonder what one with such a belief would have to say concerning animal husbandry which has created changes in many types of animals since many started domesticating them. Evolution does not contridiict the idea that a greater power has set this ball rolling or even activily using it to move the world forward.

My 2cents anyway.

--------------
Ian Skinner
Web Programmer
BloodSource
www.BloodSource.org
Sacramento, CA

"C code. C code run. Run code run. Please!"
- Cynthia Dunning

Confidentiality Notice: This message including any
attachments is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged
information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or
distribution is prohibited. If you are not the
intended recipient, please contact the sender and
delete any copies of this message.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167679
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Howie Hamlin

2005-08-02 21:46:23 UTC

Permalink

Well, evolution posits that life on this world is millions of years old. Creationism puts it at more like 5,000 so that is a big conflict.

HOwie

--- On Tuesday, August 02, 2005 5:14 PM, Ian Skinner scribed: ---

Post by Ian Skinner
"The teaching of evolution directly conflicts with many, if not most,
religious explanations."
Actually it doesn't if one actually looks at how limited the theroy
is. It more or less boils down to "life on earth changes."
Unless you subscribe to the idea that all life on earth has been here
as it is since the beginning without changing. And I would wonder
what one with such a belief would have to say concerning animal
husbandry which has created changes in many types of animals since
many started domesticating them. Evolution does not contridiict the
idea that a greater power has set this ball rolling or even activily
using it to move the world forward.
My 2cents anyway.
--------------
Ian Skinner
Web Programmer
BloodSource
www.BloodSource.org
Sacramento, CA
"C code. C code run. Run code run. Please!"
- Cynthia Dunning
Confidentiality Notice: This message including any
attachments is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged
information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or
distribution is prohibited. If you are not the
intended recipient, please contact the sender and
delete any copies of this message.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Protect your mail server with built in anti-virus protection. It's not only good for you, it's good for everybody.
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=39

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167697
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Judith Dinowitz

2005-08-02 21:54:28 UTC

Permalink

Thank you, Ian. That was well-said.

In Yeshiva, where I studied, we learned science in our science classes, and nothing we learned contradicted what we studied in school about Judaism. Because we were taught Judaism as the basis for our lives and beliefs, and science was simply science. Another course of study.

Judith
----- Original Message -----

Post by Ian Skinner
"The teaching of evolution directly conflicts with many, if not most, religious explanations."
Actually it doesn't if one actually looks at how limited the theroy is. It more or less boils down to "life on earth changes."
Unless you subscribe to the idea that all life on earth has been here as it is since the beginning without changing. And I would wonder what one with such a belief would have to say concerning animal husbandry which has created changes in many types of animals since many started domesticating them. Evolution does not contridiict the idea that a greater power has set this ball rolling or even activily using it to move the world forward.
My 2cents anyway.
--------------
Ian Skinner
Web Programmer
BloodSource
www.BloodSource.org
Sacramento, CA
"C code. C code run. Run code run. Please!"
- Cynthia Dunning
Confidentiality Notice: This message including any
attachments is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged
information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or
distribution is prohibited. If you are not the
intended recipient, please contact the sender and
delete any copies of this message.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167699
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

SStewart

2005-08-02 21:18:49 UTC

Permalink

Post by Kevin Graeme

no this is called science, there is no anti-religious anything except what is in the mind of the paranoid.

Post by Kevin Graeme

There is no effort to atheize the US, there *is* an effort underway to "Christianize" (in the neo-con quazi-politcal, profit making, exclude those we don't see fit, sense of the word) this country.

The attempt to do this goes against the first amendment.

Scott A. Stewart,
Web Application Developer

Engineering Consulting Services, Ltd. (ECS)
14026 Thunderbolt Place, Suite 300
Chantilly, VA 20151
Phone: (703) 995-1737
Fax: (703) 834-5527

"Many thousands of years ago, a blue faced Pict stepped on a bloated sheep carcass... and thus the Pipes were born"

.... the Scottish Rogues

-----Original Message-----
From: Matthew Small [mailto:***@amcity.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 05:03 pm
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom
Importance: Low

How about as a theory that does not mention Jesus Christ, Allah, Budda or
Loki? If we're talking about science, it is, another theory of how life
developed on Earth, regardless of whether or not you choose to believe it.

Put another way, it should be either all or none. The teaching of evolution
directly conflicts with many, if not most, religious explanations. To teach
only evolution would be in effect a religious/anti-religious movement
(atheism?) which serves to undermine the religious teachings that the parent
conveys onto the child.

Further, even if you consider this purely religion, rather than science, the
Constitution says that no prohibition to practice religion will be condoned.
That part of the Constitution is usually forgotten in the effort to atheize
(my new word) the US.

Matthew Small

-----Original Message-----
From: Sam [mailto:***@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 4:54 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom

Not even as history?

Post by Kevin Graeme
Religion shouldn't be taught in public schools.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167682
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Ian Skinner

2005-08-02 21:56:22 UTC

Permalink

I don't think evolution posits the age of anything. Archeology I'm sure has something to say, fossils and all that. Now evolution is happy to posit a reason for the changes in animals noted by archeologists. But if all archeological evidence is disproved and a creation date is found to be exactly 5000 years ago, evolution is still valid, because life has still changed in that time.

Anthropology might also have something to say about how long man has been around.

--------------
Ian Skinner
Web Programmer
BloodSource
www.BloodSource.org
Sacramento, CA

"C code. C code run. Run code run. Please!"
- Cynthia Dunning

....-----Original Message-----
....From: Howie Hamlin [mailto:***@coolfusion.com]
....Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 2:46 PM
....To: CF-Community
....Subject: Re: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom
....
....Well, evolution posits that life on this world is millions of years old.
....Creationism puts it at more like 5,000 so that is a big conflict.
....
....HOwie

Confidentiality Notice: This message including any
attachments is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged
information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or
distribution is prohibited. If you are not the
intended recipient, please contact the sender and
delete any copies of this message.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Purchase Captivate from House of Fusion, a Macromedia Authorized Affiliate and support the CF community.
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=52

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167703
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Howie Hamlin

2005-08-02 22:01:09 UTC

Permalink

If evolution from primoridal soup to modern man occurred in only 5000 years then would it not be valid to expect that man would have changed significantly since the beginning of recorded history? And, since this is not the case, then isn't it also valid to assume that evolution would have occurred over millions of years? After all, it's called "evolution" and not "revolution" <g>

Howie

--- On Tuesday, August 02, 2005 5:56 PM, Ian Skinner scribed: ---

Post by Ian Skinner
I don't think evolution posits the age of anything. Archeology I'm
sure has something to say, fossils and all that. Now evolution is
happy to posit a reason for the changes in animals noted by
archeologists. But if all archeological evidence is disproved and a
creation date is found to be exactly 5000 years ago, evolution is
still valid, because life has still changed in that time.
Anthropology might also have something to say about how long man has been around.
--------------
Ian Skinner
Web Programmer
BloodSource
www.BloodSource.org
Sacramento, CA
"C code. C code run. Run code run. Please!"
- Cynthia Dunning

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167704
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Jim Davis

2005-08-02 22:10:57 UTC

Permalink

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 5:56 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom
I don't think evolution posits the age of anything. Archeology I'm sure

Not directly - but definitely indirectly.

Evolution's claims can only be reasonably considered if we are talking about
vast periods of time.

has something to say, fossils and all that. Now evolution is happy to
posit a reason for the changes in animals noted by archeologists. But if
all archeological evidence is disproved and a creation date is found to be
exactly 5000 years ago, evolution is still valid, because life has still
changed in that time.

True - but some of the major aspects of evolution (descendency from a common
ancestor for example) would have to change.

However this is the key:

Evolutionary theory like ALL scientific theories will change as new evidence
arises. It has already changed greatly in the past 100 years: it's been
refined, tested, poked and generally put through a wringer.

ID Theory is not willing to change. It defined a strict cause from outset
and will not modify that cause.

Evolution observed and generated mechanisms to explain those observations.

ID made a statement of cause and looked for any evidence that supported it
and threw away evidence that didn't.

That just isn't science.

Jim Davis

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167711
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Nick McClure

2005-08-02 22:06:03 UTC

Permalink

Wait, Creationism and ID are two different things.

Evolution doesn't address the age of the planet, neither does ID. They
only address how life came to be.

If somebody is including the creation in ID, then they are teaching it
wrong.

-----Original Message-----
From: Howie Hamlin [mailto:***@coolfusion.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 5:46 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom

Well, evolution posits that life on this world is millions of years old.
Creationism puts it at more like 5,000 so that is a big conflict.

HOwie

--- On Tuesday, August 02, 2005 5:14 PM, Ian Skinner scribed: ---

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167707
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Ian Skinner

2005-08-02 22:08:18 UTC

Permalink

I'm actually not sure what your argument was. But I think it ended up supporting my idea, at least the way I read it.

Whether you subscribe to millions of years or 5000, evolution is happy to be there to support changes to life. Man has changed in the last 5000 years. We have changed in the last 1000. The average height is several inches taller then man in the middle ages. Our pinkies are shrinking. Brain size has increased.

Now if you want to get from a single cell to a modern human, then you probably aren't looking at most religious texts anyway so the probably are not trying to squeeze all that into the last few millennia.

--------------
Ian Skinner
Web Programmer
BloodSource
www.BloodSource.org
Sacramento, CA

"C code. C code run. Run code run. Please!"
- Cynthia Dunning

....-----Original Message-----
....From: Howie Hamlin [mailto:***@coolfusion.com]
....Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 3:01 PM
....To: CF-Community
....Subject: Re: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom
....
....If evolution from primoridal soup to modern man occurred in only 5000
....years then would it not be valid to expect that man would have changed
....significantly since the beginning of recorded history? And, since this
....is not the case, then isn't it also valid to assume that evolution would
....have occurred over millions of years? After all, it's called "evolution"
....and not "revolution" <g>
....
....Howie
....
....--- On Tuesday, August 02, 2005 5:56 PM, Ian Skinner scribed: ---
....>
....> I don't think evolution posits the age of anything. Archeology I'm
....> sure has something to say, fossils and all that. Now evolution is
....> happy to posit a reason for the changes in animals noted by
....> archeologists. But if all archeological evidence is disproved and a
....> creation date is found to be exactly 5000 years ago, evolution is
....> still valid, because life has still changed in that time.
....>
....> Anthropology might also have something to say about how long man has
....> been around.
....>
....> --------------
....> Ian Skinner
....> Web Programmer
....> BloodSource
....> www.BloodSource.org
....> Sacramento, CA
....>
....> "C code. C code run. Run code run. Please!"
....> - Cynthia Dunning
....>
....
....

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167709
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Nick McClure

2005-08-02 22:09:07 UTC

Permalink

Many religious scholars agree that the 5000 year thing is a bit off the
wall. There are some hardliners out there that still think that way.

Most will also agree that because the bible and those stories make no
statement about what constitutes a day, or a year, that there is no true
way to determine the time span.

-----Original Message-----
From: Howie Hamlin [mailto:***@coolfusion.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 6:01 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom

If evolution from primoridal soup to modern man occurred in only 5000
years then would it not be valid to expect that man would have changed
significantly since the beginning of recorded history? And, since this
is not the case, then isn't it also valid to assume that evolution would
have occurred over millions of years? After all, it's called
"evolution" and not "revolution" <g>

Howie

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167710
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Ian Skinner

2005-08-02 22:19:52 UTC

Permalink

One thing I've always wondered about. If one takes the passage in the Bible that lists the order of creation. It is not really all that far off from the order provided by in evolution (if we ignore the time scale differences). It lists the animals in basically the same order from simpler to more complex ending at man. Even starting in the seas and going to land.

In my mind they really do not conflict.

--------------
Ian Skinner
Web Programmer
BloodSource
www.BloodSource.org
Sacramento, CA

"C code. C code run. Run code run. Please!"
- Cynthia Dunning

....-----Original Message-----
....From: Judith Dinowitz [mailto:***@houseoffusion.com]
....Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 2:54 PM
....To: CF-Community
....Subject: Re: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom
....
....Thank you, Ian. That was well-said.
....
....In Yeshiva, where I studied, we learned science in our science classes,
....and nothing we learned contradicted what we studied in school about
....Judaism. Because we were taught Judaism as the basis for our lives and
....beliefs, and science was simply science. Another course of study.
....
....Judith

Confidentiality Notice: This message including any
attachments is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged
information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or
distribution is prohibited. If you are not the
intended recipient, please contact the sender and
delete any copies of this message.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167715
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Jim Davis

2005-08-02 22:28:14 UTC

Permalink

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 6:20 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom
One thing I've always wondered about. If one takes the passage in the
Bible that lists the order of creation. It is not really all that far off
from the order provided by in evolution (if we ignore the time scale
differences). It lists the animals in basically the same order from
simpler to more complex ending at man. Even starting in the seas and
going to land.
In my mind they really do not conflict.

I always thought the little scene in "Oh God" about this was cute (I know
I've got it wrong):

"Did you really create the whole world in just one day?"

"Sure. But my days are a lot longer than yours."

Jim Davis

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Stay Ahead of Hackers - Download ZoneAlarm Pro
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=65

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167721
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Nick McClure

2005-08-02 22:24:36 UTC

Permalink

Jim, there is a very simple argument that while I don't agree with, is
almost impossible for science to argue with.

Faith.

Hard line religions tell us that the scientific evidence you claim is
fact was placed there by god to tell the good people from the infidels.

Now, I haven't read much of the papers behind ID, but what little I have
read doesn't deal with the actual creation of the universe, or the
earth. Or even of the religious stories in the bible.

Just that a creator, made certain determinations as to what types of
living things there would be, and how they would interact with the other
ones.

All I'm saying, is what if, what if God created Earth, set everything up
the way he did, and while he was playing around for what to us would
seem like to us a few million years, was to him a few days.

The truth is that the bible doesn't really talk about this stuff.

If you are teaching ID in the biology class, then it should deal with
the creation of the earth, just of life. Same with Evolution, which also
doesn't deal with the creation of the earth, or of life for that matter,
only the changes of life after it was created.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Davis [mailto:***@depressedpress.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 6:02 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom

4) ID provides no observable predictions. This means that it's nearly
impossible to use ID as a foundational topic for further learning in
science. This isn't a major issue from the perspective of whether it's
"good science" or not but it plays a major role in teaching. A good,
solid
understanding of evolution immediately gives a student a leg up in many
aspects of science.

5) ID is not supported by the scientific community as a viable theory.
When
creating curricula it's generally a good idea to pay attention to that
area's professional community. In this case however we're seeing more
attention paid to politicians and other lay people.

In general considering ID from a purely scientific, unbiased viewpoint
how
could you reasonably place it on even ground with Evolution? ID is, in
its
current formulation, perhaps a decade old. Evolutionary theory has been
challenged and tested for well over 100 years.

Why should this upstart, poorly formulated, poorly documented, unwilling
to
change theory be given equal footing?

If science class is to make any sense the what's taught in it must
adhere to
the (admittedly arbitrary) boundaries set forth.

Post by Nick McClure
I'm not sure why that doesn't have a place in school. I'm not saying I
agree
with the theory, I'm just saying that when the majority of the Country
thinks it is fact, preventing the schools system from teaching it does

Post by Nick McClure
disservice to the students.

Whoa - stop right there. NOBODY is "preventing" the schools from
teaching
it. The stakes here are on approved science curriculum: what gets
tested
for on standardized tests.

Schools can teach it if they like.

The problem is that most schools are choosing not to teach it. The
scientific community doesn't support it as a valid, documented theory
yet.

All of the trials and cases on this topic have either been to 1)
downgrade
the status of Evolutionary theory in the classroom or 2) force the
addition
of ID.

Jim Davis

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167718
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Jim Davis

2005-08-02 22:34:28 UTC

Permalink

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 6:25 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom
Jim, there is a very simple argument that while I don't agree with, is
almost impossible for science to argue with.
Faith.

Science doesn't want to argue with faith at all. Nor do it.

However neither of us wants to see it taught in the science classroom.

The instant "faith" is needed to explain any phenomenon you've left the
realms of science.

To be clear however I am still just talking about the science curricula.
There is definitely room for faith in other aspects of teaching and,
undoubtedly, in the science student.

Jim Davis

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167723
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Jim Davis

2005-08-02 22:41:53 UTC

Permalink

For those that have never actually read about this stuff CSICOP has a very
good critique of ID here:

http://www.csicop.org/si/2001-09/design.html

Obviously it's critical, but it covers much of the more pragmatic material
(it leaves out the biblical literalists for example) and offers a nice
historical overview.

Jim Davis

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167725
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

DRE

2005-08-02 22:50:26 UTC

Permalink

What kills me is that ID is a product of evolution! They couldnt get
creationism into schools so they changed it to something that might.

DRE

Post by Jim Davis

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167728
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Jim Davis

2005-08-02 23:20:56 UTC

Permalink

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 6:50 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom
What kills me is that ID is a product of evolution! They couldnt get
creationism into schools so they changed it to something that might.

Well - that's not really "evolution". ;^)

Biological Evolution is a very useful metaphor for many processes: social,
economic, geological, anthropological, etc but none of them are really
"Evolution" in the biological sense (and it's only biological evolution
that's being challenged by ID).

But the argument still stands: ID is considered by many to be a "wedge"
strategy which is why it's fought to stridently. This is borne out to at
least some degree by the fact that many vocal proponents of ID are also
Christian Fundamentalists.

The ID "movement" has a definite, organized "two prong" approach:

1) Add ID to current curricula. They want their theory taught in schools.
This is actually quite odd, especially in science. Very rarely do
proponents of a scientific idea lobby school boards for inclusion. Rather
the idea becomes accepted in the broad, professional scientific community
first and is added "naturally".

2) Downgrade Evolution. This is the worse side of things in my opinion.
Whether or not ID is added to the curricula IDers in general (or at least
the vocal ones) lobby to have Evolution disclaimed or, at worst, removed
from the required curricula.

Again, this is very odd in science. Science is full of competing theories
and explanations but few are as generally accepted as Evolution. Again this
is an attempt to circumvent the natural dissemination of science information
from research to professional acceptance to curricula.

There is little question in my mind that those IDers than are picketing
school boards and proposing disclaimers in schoolbooks are religiously
motivated.

However there are also IDers that are legitimate scientists. They are
attempting to test their hypothesis and are working within the confines of
science. They will defend their hypothesis but will also admit that much
more work needs to be done in the efforts to confirm it.

However these folks are unfortunately in the silent minority.

Jim Davis

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167736
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Sam

2005-08-02 23:43:15 UTC

Permalink

Here's a good write-up of ID.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design

Kind of long, I only read half, but that half was interesting.

Post by Jim Davis
Biological Evolution is a very useful metaphor for many processes: social,
economic, geological, anthropological, etc but none of them are really
"Evolution" in the biological sense (and it's only biological evolution
that's being challenged by ID).
But the argument still stands: ID is considered by many to be a "wedge"
strategy which is why it's fought to stridently. This is borne out to at
least some degree by the fact that many vocal proponents of ID are also
Christian Fundamentalists.
1) Add ID to current curricula. They want their theory taught in schools.
This is actually quite odd, especially in science. Very rarely do
proponents of a scientific idea lobby school boards for inclusion. Rather
the idea becomes accepted in the broad, professional scientific community
first and is added "naturally".
2) Downgrade Evolution. This is the worse side of things in my opinion.
Whether or not ID is added to the curricula IDers in general (or at least
the vocal ones) lobby to have Evolution disclaimed or, at worst, removed
from the required curricula.
Again, this is very odd in science. Science is full of competing theories
and explanations but few are as generally accepted as Evolution. Again this
is an attempt to circumvent the natural dissemination of science information
from research to professional acceptance to curricula.
There is little question in my mind that those IDers than are picketing
school boards and proposing disclaimers in schoolbooks are religiously
motivated.
However there are also IDers that are legitimate scientists. They are
attempting to test their hypothesis and are working within the confines of
science. They will defend their hypothesis but will also admit that much
more work needs to be done in the efforts to confirm it.
However these folks are unfortunately in the silent minority.
Jim Davis

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167741
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Nick McClure

2005-08-02 22:41:20 UTC

Permalink

You telling me faith isn't needed to explain science? I'm sure as hell
relying on faith every time I board and airplane. Sure I know the
science behind it, air beneath the wing is denser than the air above it.

We must rely on faith, because we certainly don't know for sure. We have
a pretty good idea, but what is to say there isn't something that can
change those rules?

What if tomorrow gravity was just a bit stronger? What if the world
started to spin faster?

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Davis [mailto:***@depressedpress.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 6:34 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom

Science doesn't want to argue with faith at all. Nor do it.

However neither of us wants to see it taught in the science classroom.

The instant "faith" is needed to explain any phenomenon you've left the
realms of science.

To be clear however I am still just talking about the science curricula.
There is definitely room for faith in other aspects of teaching and,
undoubtedly, in the science student.

Jim Davis

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167724
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Jim Davis

2005-08-02 23:06:19 UTC

Permalink

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 6:41 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom
You telling me faith isn't needed to explain science? I'm sure as hell
relying on faith every time I board and airplane. Sure I know the
science behind it, air beneath the wing is denser than the air above it.

Faith isn't needed for the explanation - it's needed for your acceptance of
the phenomenon.

This isn't something that can be taught, it's personal. I, for example, do
not have faith that an airplane can fly: that's a fact. I simply have faith
(or more specifically, hope) that THIS airplane will fly.

Your faith in the airplane's ability to stay up has nothing to do with it's
ability to stay up. An airplane full of people that don't believe it can
fly still flies.

We must rely on faith, because we certainly don't know for sure. We have
a pretty good idea, but what is to say there isn't something that can
change those rules?

Again, an individual may rely on faith, but science doesn't.

In large part that's the whole point of science. People (including, of
course, scientists) can be petty, superstitious, arrogant, prideful or
stupid. The methods of science attempt to reach the truth of a matter by
eliminating all of that.

In large part it's successful. Peer review, predictive testing, the
scientific method, etc all work very well to "get at the meat". Failures
may upset humans but are embraced by science. Successes are successes only
until better tests and evidence come along.

What if tomorrow gravity was just a bit stronger? What if the world
started to spin faster?

Then things would change. Things always change.

But they would change logically because of an observed difference. That's
the way science works.

Science doesn't demand to know the cause for everything. However it does
demand evidence, lots and lots and lots of evidence, before a cause is
promoted to a Theory.

Jim Davis

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167732
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Nick McClure

2005-08-03 01:18:18 UTC

Permalink

How do you debunk something that is not provable. ID relies on faith.
Science cannot disprove it.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jerry Johnson [mailto:***@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 8:02 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom

Maybe ID should be taught as a lesson in applying scientific
principles to a theory. By this measure, wouldn't it be debunked
fairly quickly as a theory? I wonder if this is a possibility thought
of by the proponents of ID?

As for religion being taught in the schools, I think comparative
religion classes should be mandatory. Knowing the ins-and-outs of
religions, cultures and societies is an important social tool, IMHO.
Organized religions spend a lot of time explaining why "Our Way" is
the only right way. A little more understanding of how close the
others have it might go a long way towards a kinder, gentler nation.

For example, the information I have gained on these lists about
Judaism and Catholicism have been very enlightening.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167756
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Jim Davis

2005-08-03 02:50:00 UTC

Permalink

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 9:18 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom
How do you debunk something that is not provable. ID relies on faith.
Science cannot disprove it.

Which is exactly why it should not be taught in science class. ;^)

But let's be clear: ID does not rely on faith. It's been adopted and
promoted by those of faith, but the hypothesis doesn't require it.

At its heart ID is the proposal that certain aspects of the natural world
are so perfect, so well formed, so complex that they couldn't be arise via
non-intelligent, random means.

The classic example is that you're walking through the woods surrounded by
nature and you come across an automobile. It should be clear that the
automobile is not "natural": somebody (or something) made it. Thought it up
and constructed it.

ID claims that this same sort of reasoning can be applied to biology and
other natural sciences.

Another aspect of ID is the "made to order" hypotheses. In this way of
thinking aspects of the natural world are pointed to as being just too
perfect for our use to be coincidence. Our atmosphere is thick enough to
support us and protect us from solar radiation but clear enough to see
through.

Beyond chance the Earth is exactly the "right" temperature for us. We have
enough of everything and so forth: in short things are so "good" for us that
that they must have been planned that way.

Another aspect is the concept of "irreducible complexity". This occurs, so
say the IDers, when a natural construct is so complex as to be useless in
any part or any half-step. The human eye is the most common example. IDers
ask "since a partial eye is useless how could it have evolved to it's
current level of sophistication?"

None of the basic tenets of ID require faith.

Of course the real issue is none of them actually require intelligence
either.

Scientists are all but certain that even the most complex natural structures
and behaviors could evolve in the vast time span given. Remember also that
natural evolution is far from random: it follows the natural laws of
chemistry and physics and so forth. The primordial stuff of our planet is
more likely than not to combine in the direction of life. And that life is
more likely than not to evolve in the direction of improvement.

The Earth seems so friendly to us, so "made to order" because we evolved
here to thrive in this exact environment. To say the fact that we "fit" so
well here is anything more than natural is just muddling cause and effect.

Irreducible Complexity falls apart easily when challenged (there are, for
example dozens of examples in currently living creatures of "partial" eyes
that all provide a benefit to the creatures that have them and could easily
be seen as evolutionary steps to our kind of eye).

The basic scientific concepts of ID are actually quite interesting and worth
thinking about. They just don't hold up under study and comparison.
Occam's Razor at work.

Jim Davis

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how to get a fax number that sends and receives faxes using your current email address
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=64

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167766
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Nick McClure

2005-08-03 01:21:22 UTC

Permalink

So, how exactly do you test evolution? How do you prove that evolution
is not the result of a greater power influencing the change?

The question of God will always come into play because to those people
that believe God created the heavens and the earth and creatures and
man, then how will you ever prove to them that God does not exist, and
that God did not design the creatures, in the order prescribed in
Genesis?

-----Original Message-----
From: Larry C. Lyons [mailto:***@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 8:43 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom

So in that case, speaking as Pope, the late John Paul's encyclical on
evolution was incorrect? It concluded that there was evolution and the
teachings of the Catholic Church were not in conflict. Same with the
Episcopalian and most other protestant churches. Only the evangelical
churches that follow a prescript of biblical literalism or other
fundimentalist belief object to the scientific theory of evolution
being taught in science classes.

I am all for competing theories being taught in science classes.
Provided the following: the competing theory fit within the same
criteria as any scientific theory; It explains the available data more
adequately than the current theories and is testable.

Only the theory of evolution fit all these criteria. Creationism fails
on all of them and Intelligent Design fails on all as well.

I have no objection to your practicing religion in its proper place.
By wanting to practice it in the school, gives a government stamp of
approval to that religious belief. That directly violates the
separation clause.

larry

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167757
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Larry C. Lyons

2005-08-03 01:50:15 UTC

Permalink

Rather than answer in my halting way, I'll let the talk.origins FAQ
explain - it offers some examples of evolution making some
predictions. As for your other point, how do you demonstrate support
for the negative.

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA210.html

3. Evolution has been the basis of many predictions. For example:

* Darwin predicted, based on homologies with African apes,
that human ancestors arose in Africa. That prediction has been
supported by fossil and genetic evidence (Ingman et al. 2000).
* Theory predicted that organisms in heterogeneous and
rapidly changing environments should have higher mutation rates. This
has been found in the case of bacteria infecting the lungs of chronic
cystic fibrosis patients (Oliver et al. 2000).
* Predator-prey dynamics are altered in predictable ways by
evolution of the prey (Yoshida et al. 2003).
* Ernst Mayr predicted in 1954 that speciation should be
accompanied with faster genetic evolution. A phylogenetic analysis has
supported this prediction (Webster et al. 2003).
* Several authors predicted characteristics of the ancestor
of craniates. On the basis of a detailed study, they found the fossil
Haikouella "fit these predictions closely" (Mallatt and Chen 2003).
* Evolution predicts that different sets of character data
should still give the same phylogenetic trees. This has been confirmed
informally myriad times and quantitatively, with different protein
sequences, by Penny et al. (1982).

With predictions such as these and others, evolution can be, and
has been, put to practical use in areas such as drug discovery and
avoidance of resistant pests.

4. If evolution's low power to make future predictions keeps it
from being a science, then some other fields of study cease to be
sciences, too, especially archeology and astronomy.

Links:
Wilkins, John. 1997. Evolution and philosophy: Predictions and
explanations. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolphil/predict.html
References:

1. Ingman, M., H. Kaessmann, S. Paaba and U. Gyllensten. 2000.
Mitochondrial genome variation and the origin of modern humans. Nature
408: 708-713 . See also: Blair Hedges, S. 2000. A start for population
genomics. Nature 408: 552-553. See also: Thomson, Jeremy, 2000 (7
Dec.). Humans did come out of Africa, says DNA. Nature Science Update,
http://www.nature.com/nsu/001207/001207-8.html
2. Mallatt, J. and J.-Y. Chen. 2003. Fossil sister group of
craniates: Predicted and found. Journal of Morphology 258(1): 1-31.
3. Oliver, Antonio et al. 2000. High frequency of hypermutable
Pseudomonas aeruginosa in cystic fibrosis lung infection. Science 288:
1251-1253. See also Rainey, P. B. and R. Moxon. 2000. When being hyper
keeps you fit. Science 288: 1186-1187. See also: LeClerc, J. E. and T.
A. Cebula. 2000. Pseudomonas survival strategies in cystic fibrosis
(letter), 2000. Science 289: 391-392.
4. Penny, David, L. R. Foulds, and M. D. Hendy. 1982. Testing the
theory of evolution by comparing phylogenetic trees constructed from
five different protein sequences. Nature 297: 197-200.
5. Webster, Andrea J., Robert J. H. Payne, and Mark Pagel. 2003.
Molecular phylogenies link rates of evolution and speciation. Science
301: 478.
6. Yoshida, T., L. E. Jones, S. P. Ellner, G. F. Fussmann and N. G.
Hairston Jr. 2003. Rapid evolution drives ecological dynamics in a
predator-prey system. Nature 424: 303-306.

Further Reading:
Rainey, Paul. 2003. Evolution: Five big questions: 4. Is evolution
predictable? New Scientist 178(2399) (14 June): 37-38.

Post by Nick McClure
So, how exactly do you test evolution? How do you prove that evolution
is not the result of a greater power influencing the change?
The question of God will always come into play because to those people
that believe God created the heavens and the earth and creatures and
man, then how will you ever prove to them that God does not exist, and
that God did not design the creatures, in the order prescribed in
Genesis?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167759
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

S. Isaac Dealey

2005-08-03 01:46:32 UTC

Permalink

Post by Jim Davis
For those that have never actually read about this stuff
CSICOP has a very
http://www.csicop.org/si/2001-09/design.html
Obviously it's critical, but it covers much of the more
pragmatic material
(it leaves out the biblical literalists for example) and
offers a nice
historical overview.
Jim Davis

It's a good writeup... It's unfortunate that people seem to be either
well versed in the science and poorly educated in the philosophy or
well versed in religion (not philosophy) and poorly versed in the
science. It might be nice to a writeup of such a thing from someone
well versed in both science and philosophy. This particular writeup is
lacking in the philosophy department.

Although I'm not going to dispute his conclusions, I will point out
two things he missed:

1) he describes "intelligent natural design" as being the product of
humans or possibly extraterrestrials, but overlooks the fact that
there are other terrestrial organisms which engage in intelligent
natural design. I've sceen film footage of a gorilla carefully
removing each individual leaf from a long (and comparatively fragile)
twig in order to use the twig as a tool to fetch ants or termites to
eat. While it's certainly not the brooklyn bridge, I can't imagine how
or why someone could describe this as not being intelligent or not
being an instance of design (given his explanation of "design" in the
article).

2) It is not necessary for an "omnipotent" and omnibenevolent deity to
create perfect organisms. The assumption that such a deity would
necessarily create perfect biological organisms requires a predicated
belief that perfect organisms were in fact God's intent in our design
(the end is the means). It is entirely possible that a metaphysical
outcome (spiritual growth for example) requires the experience of an
imperfect biological body, hence the imperfection would in fact be
part of the "efficient cause" of our being (the blueprint for our
spiritual growth). If you want to get nit-picky you could say that a
truly "omnipotent" deity could simply instill spiritual growth in us
without the need for us living, although if that's the case, then why
would we exist at all, even as non-corporeal spirits? What purpose
could/would we serve if there were no need for us to ever do anything?
So I submit that there is perhaps an ... "experiential barrier" (for
lack of a better term) which need not limit the physical omnipotence
of a deity but which may place some absolute limits on circumstantial
"potential" via certain paradoxes (i.e. can the omnipotent god create
a rock so heavy the omnipotent god can't lift it?).

The cartoon is sweet! :)

s. isaac dealey 954.522.6080
new epoch : isn't it time for a change?

add features without fixtures with
the onTap open source framework

http://www.fusiontap.com
http://coldfusion.sys-con.com/author/4806Dealey.htm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167758
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Jim Davis

2005-08-03 03:20:45 UTC

Permalink

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 9:47 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom

Well I would argue that it's not needed. ID proponent's whole argument is
that ID is a science. "Pure science", not religion, not philosophy.

Either defense or criticism of it should then be purely scientific, don't
you think?

There is definitely the social aspect of ID, the religious under- (and
over-) tones and such that could make for many interesting philosophical
articles and discussions: but to critique ID you must do it on the terms
laid out.

Although I'm not going to dispute his conclusions, I will point out

Honestly your issues are with the part of the article I personally didn't
like much. ;^)

The idea he tried to present was interesting, but he presented to quickly,
with too little detail and with too many absolute statements. I'mnot sure
if it was just the limited space of the magazine or what but that whole last
section just kind of (for me) meandered on without saying all that much.

Although the first point -- tool-using in animals -- has been hotly debated
for years. How much of it is "design" and how much is instinct? It's been
proven in several cases that some behaviors must be taught or they don't
appear and others appear regardless of teaching.

Does an ape "Design" his termite twig? Is there intelligence, or (to be a
little dramatic) an elegance to a Sea Otter's selection of clam-cracker?

Certain behaviors (some pretty complex) are specific to certain families of
dolphins or chimps but are unseen in others.

All told it's a really fascinating subject. ;^)

Jim Davis

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167768
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

James Smith

2005-08-03 08:50:23 UTC

Permalink

I can't believe this subject keeps cropping up as an issue, I mean it has
generated 70 messages over night, and it's a load of bollox!

Don't get me wrong, if you want to believe in a creator, that's fine. If
you want to believe the earth is 6000 years old, that's fine too. I don't
believe it for one second but it is your choice and I won't knock it or try
to impose my beliefs upon you.

If you want creationism taught in your public schools that is also your
right, vote for it, change your constitution, do whatever it takes.

DO NOT mistake it for a science.

Intelligent Design is a bullshit cover up way of putting spin onto
creationism, it is religion no matter what you call it.

Over here we have a way round this, we have Religious Studies classes where
all of the worlds religions are taught. For three years I spent 1 hour a
week learning about these religions. This is where ID should be taught.

This is an argument that I am sure will run and run, and I have no doubt
that eventually the religious right will will. It is a sad day when the
most advanced, wealthiest and most scientific country in the world adopts
religious beliefs as truth and scientific.

Teaching it is fine, teaching it isn't a bad thing, teaching it as a science
is crap, there is NO science behind ID.

--
Jay

-----Original Message-----
Sent: 02 August 2005 21:20
To: CF-Community
Subject: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom

From this morning's washington post

washingtonpost.com
Bush: Intelligent Design Should Be Taught OK that subject
line is a bit biased but I noticed this little tidbit in this
morning's Washington Post. He has fits over how well children
are doing in our classrooms (ie., No Child Left Behind), and
yet wants to help guarentee that they will be left behind, at
least when it comes to science instruction.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/0
2/AR2005080200493.html?sub=AR
http://tinyurl.com/9gg7z
The Associated Press
Tuesday, August 2, 2005; 7:05 AM
WASHINGTON -- President Bush said Monday he believes schools
should discuss "intelligent design" alongside evolution when
teaching students about the creation of life.
During a round-table interview with reporters from five Texas
newspapers, Bush declined to go into detail on his personal
views of the origin of life. But he said students should
learn about both theories, Knight Ridder Newspapers reported.
"I think that part of education is to expose people to
different schools of thought," Bush said. "You're asking me
whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas,
the answer is yes."
The theory of intelligent design says life on earth is too
complex to have developed through evolution, implying that a
higher power must have had a hand in creation.
Christian conservatives _ a substantial part of Bush's voting
base _ have been pushing for the teaching of intelligent
design in public schools. Scientists have rejected the theory
as an attempt to force religion into science education.
_Refused to discuss the investigation into whether political
aide Karl Rove or any other White House official leaked a CIA
officer's identity, but he stood behind Rove. "Karl's got my
complete confidence. He's a valuable member of my team," Bush said.
_Said he did not ask Supreme Court nominee John Roberts about
his views on Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that legalized abortion.
_Said he hopes to work with Congress to pass an immigration
reform bill this fall, including provisions for guest workers
and enhanced security along the U.S.-Mexico border.
Bush spoke with reporters from the San Antonio Express-News,
the Houston Chronicle, The Dallas Morning News, the Fort
Worth Star-Telegram and The Austin American-Statesman.
(c) 2005 The Associated Press

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167781
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=13124.11887.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54