View Poll Results: Which should be taught in school science classes?

Voters
102. You may not vote on this poll
  • Evolution

    80 78.43%
  • Intelligent Design

    1 0.98%
  • Creationism

    0 0%
  • Every theory in this area

    11 10.78%
  • Only these 3 or 2 of these three

    3 2.94%
  • None of these

    4 3.92%
  • Other

    3 2.94%
Page 25 of 32 FirstFirst ... 152324252627 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 250 of 314

Thread: Which should be taught in school science classes?

  1. #241
    Sage
    Guy Incognito's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 07:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,216

    Re: Which should be taught in school science classes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Orion View Post
    Creationism and intelligent design cannot possible be science because they are based on the Bible, which pre-dates the western sciences as we know them. Even Vatican scholars acknowledge this.

    Science investigates and alters its laws according to new data. Creationism and intelligent design are not hypotheses, they are set beliefs which creationists then go out to find proof for. Their methodology alone makes them unscientific. A conclusion should never be pre-determined before an experiment is even set to begin.
    That's not necessarily true about intelligent design. It's possible to make that into a falsifiable hypothesis. Of course, that means it would be subject to scientific scrutiny and probably wouldn't pan out, but hey, that's still science. No shame a hypothesis not working out as long as you applied the scientific method properly. And really, there is no evidence either way on ID until that falsifiable version is formulated. I compare it to steady-state theory in cosmology. Almost everybody believe in the big bang, but that doesn't mean steady-state proponents are kooks, they just have a different take on the evidence. And if there is ever conclusive evidence they'll be proven wrong and accept it.

    I agree with you, though, that most people to support ID not because they think it's a legitimate scientific theory, but as a cover for creationism.

  2. #242
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: Which should be taught in school science classes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Incognito View Post
    That's not necessarily true about intelligent design. It's possible to make that into a falsifiable hypothesis. Of course, that means it would be subject to scientific scrutiny and probably wouldn't pan out, but hey, that's still science. No shame a hypothesis not working out as long as you applied the scientific method properly. And really, there is no evidence either way on ID until that falsifiable version is formulated. I compare it to steady-state theory in cosmology. Almost everybody believe in the big bang, but that doesn't mean steady-state proponents are kooks, they just have a different take on the evidence. And if there is ever conclusive evidence they'll be proven wrong and accept it.

    I agree with you, though, that most people to support ID not because they think it's a legitimate scientific theory, but as a cover for creationism.
    In order for such a hypothesis to work, creationists would have to look at all of the pre-established scientific data on evolution, examinations of geology which prove the earth is more than 6,000 years old, etc. You cannot form a hypothesis without looking at the pre-established chain of recorded discoveries (which you are in turn making a contribution to). You cannot pretend that you are a scientist while ignoring the entire scientific field. Instead, they write the entire establishment off as being agenda-based.

    Creationism is not science and it never will be. They have no real discourse with long-established scientific communities, they don't use scientific methodology, the experiments have pre-determined conclusions, and they only care about what the Bible says.

  3. #243
    Professor

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Grand Junction, CO 81506
    Last Seen
    05-30-11 @ 07:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,236

    Re: Which should be taught in school science classes?

    Quote Originally Posted by liblady View Post
    but you don't. and no, scientists who believe evolution have no agenda other than science. i've not seen any proof that that the earth is 6000 years old. do you believe that all the science is wrong when dating cave-man type fossils? in fact, how do you EXPLAIN "cavemen"? how do you explain carbon dating?
    A famous scientists makes up a theory and it becomes fact to the other lesser scientists. That's how the global warning threat started and flourished. Who knows how many other unprovable educated guesses are still out there?

    ricksfolly

  4. #244
    pirate lover
    liblady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    St Thomas, VI
    Last Seen
    03-14-16 @ 03:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    16,165
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Which should be taught in school science classes?

    Quote Originally Posted by ricksfolly View Post
    A famous scientists makes up a theory and it becomes fact to the other lesser scientists. That's how the global warning threat started and flourished. Who knows how many other unprovable educated guesses are still out there?

    ricksfolly
    none of which answers any of my questions.

    Originally Posted by johnny_rebson:

    These are the same liberals who forgot how Iraq attacked us on 9/11.


  5. #245
    Sage
    Guy Incognito's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 07:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,216

    Re: Which should be taught in school science classes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Orion View Post
    In order for such a hypothesis to work, creationists would have to look at all of the pre-established scientific data on evolution, examinations of geology which prove the earth is more than 6,000 years old, etc. You cannot form a hypothesis without looking at the pre-established chain of recorded discoveries (which you are in turn making a contribution to). You cannot pretend that you are a scientist while ignoring the entire scientific field. Instead, they write the entire establishment off as being agenda-based.

    Creationism is not science and it never will be. They have no real discourse with long-established scientific communities, they don't use scientific methodology, the experiments have pre-determined conclusions, and they only care about what the Bible says.
    Sure, but you're mistake is conflating creationism with intelligent design theory. They are different things, at least purportedly. To any fair minded scientist, a falsifiable theory at least deserve to be tested a borne out.

    Nothing in ID, so far as I understand it, suggests the earth is six thousand years old. That's creationism. ID (again as I understand it) says that the scientific account of evolution is accurate, but that evolution itself is not the product of chance, rather it had to be intelligently guided by some higher power (god, Gaia, perhaps an alien, something other than chance). That, to me, sounds like a falsifiable theory.

    So really, Orion, you're not being fair to ID proponents (I am not one, just a devil's advocate).

  6. #246
    pirate lover
    liblady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    St Thomas, VI
    Last Seen
    03-14-16 @ 03:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    16,165
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Which should be taught in school science classes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Incognito View Post
    Sure, but you're mistake is conflating creationism with intelligent design theory. They are different things, at least purportedly. To any fair minded scientist, a falsifiable theory at least deserve to be tested a borne out.

    Nothing in ID, so far as I understand it, suggests the earth is six thousand years old. That's creationism. ID (again as I understand it) says that the scientific account of evolution is accurate, but that evolution itself is not the product of chance, rather it had to be intelligently guided by some higher power (god, Gaia, perhaps an alien, something other than chance). That, to me, sounds like a falsifiable theory.

    So really, Orion, you're not being fair to ID proponents (I am not one, just a devil's advocate).
    i kind of am an id proponent, but still don't think it should ever be taught in schools.

    Originally Posted by johnny_rebson:

    These are the same liberals who forgot how Iraq attacked us on 9/11.


  7. #247
    Sage
    Guy Incognito's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 07:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,216

    Re: Which should be taught in school science classes?

    Quote Originally Posted by liblady View Post
    i kind of am an id proponent, but still don't think it should ever be taught in schools.
    Agreed, it's highly theoretical at best.

  8. #248
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:33 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,268
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Which should be taught in school science classes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Incognito View Post
    ID (again as I understand it) says that the scientific account of evolution is accurate, but that evolution itself is not the product of chance, rather it had to be intelligently guided by some higher power (god, Gaia, perhaps an alien, something other than chance). That, to me, sounds like a falsifiable theory.
    How would you test it? How is it falsifiable? What observations is it based on? How is it "correctable and dynamic"? Those questions have to be answered in order to accept it as a scientific theory.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  9. #249
    Sage
    Guy Incognito's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 07:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,216

    Re: Which should be taught in school science classes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    How would you test it? How is it falsifiable? What observations is it based on? How is it "correctable and dynamic"? Those questions have to be answered in order to accept it as a scientific theory.
    If it's shown that evolution can be a product of chance, then ID is false.

    As for the rest, that's for an ID proponent to work out isn't it?
    Last edited by Guy Incognito; 10-28-10 at 06:24 PM.

  10. #250
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Which should be taught in school science classes?

    Quote Originally Posted by ricksfolly View Post
    A famous scientists makes up a theory and it becomes fact to the other lesser scientists.
    That's not how it works, but if it makes you feel better to pretend that it does; well then more power to ya.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

Page 25 of 32 FirstFirst ... 152324252627 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •