Jump to content


Photo

Bush The Creationist.


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
33 replies to this topic

#1 The Debatinator

The Debatinator

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 198 posts
  • Age: 20
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Chicago, Illinois

Posted 04 August 2005 - 12:40 PM

http://www.cbsnews.c...ain657083.shtml

Comments?

#2 Geezer

Geezer

    Junior Member

  • Advanced member
  • PipPip
  • 72 posts
  • Age: 49
  • Judaism Orthodox
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • 3rd Rock from the Sun

Posted 04 August 2005 - 02:15 PM

From the link:
"Support for evolution is more heavily concentrated among those with more education..."

I really get tired of that one.
Has anyone ever heard of cause and effect?
Is this really the detriment non-scientific evos think it is?

#3 chance

chance

    Veteran Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2029 posts
  • Age: 51
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Australia

Posted 04 August 2005 - 02:17 PM

Have read some comments on the internet, but from my side of the Pacific the statements by Bush have gone un-reported.

IMO Bush is wrong. ID or creation are not science and thus belong in a separate area of discussion, e.g. philosophy or comparative religion classes.

[cynical] Politicians are politicians expect them to say anything that will gain them votes. [/cynical]

#4 Fred Williams

Fred Williams

    Administrator / Forum Owner

  • Admin Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2446 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Broomfield, Colorado
  • Interests:I enjoy going to Broncos games, my son's HS basketball & baseball games, and my daughter's piano & dance recitals. I enjoy playing basketball (when able). I occasionally play keyboards for my church's praise team. I am a Senior Staff Firmware Engineer at Micron, and am co-host of Real Science Radio.
  • Age: 52
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Broomfield, Colorado

Posted 04 August 2005 - 02:54 PM

There were two responses by non-Christians, which isn't allowed in the 'Christian Coffee Shop' forum so they were deleted. Debatinator, if you later decide you want responses from non-believers, please post this same OP to the "Miscellaneous" section under origins (or let me know and I'll move it for you). Thanks,

(FYI, the two deleted posts were saved and can be recovered in case Debatinator decides he wants this moved to the "Miscellaneous" section).

Fred

#5 The Debatinator

The Debatinator

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 198 posts
  • Age: 20
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Chicago, Illinois

Posted 05 August 2005 - 11:18 AM

Yes, I think it would be fair if we put it in the Misc section. Thank you, Fred.

#6 Fred Williams

Fred Williams

    Administrator / Forum Owner

  • Admin Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2446 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Broomfield, Colorado
  • Interests:I enjoy going to Broncos games, my son's HS basketball & baseball games, and my daughter's piano & dance recitals. I enjoy playing basketball (when able). I occasionally play keyboards for my church's praise team. I am a Senior Staff Firmware Engineer at Micron, and am co-host of Real Science Radio.
  • Age: 52
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Broomfield, Colorado

Posted 06 August 2005 - 09:17 AM

Yes, I think it would be fair if we put it in the Misc section.  Thank you, Fred.

View Post


OK, will do. Note that I also recovered the deleted posts (chance, Geezer), that appear above in the order they were posted.

Fred

#7 The Debatinator

The Debatinator

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 198 posts
  • Age: 20
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Chicago, Illinois

Posted 08 August 2005 - 02:47 PM

Have read some comments on the internet, but from my side of the Pacific the statements by Bush have gone un-reported.

IMO Bush is wrong.  ID or creation are not science and thus belong in a separate area of discussion, e.g. philosophy or comparative religion classes.

[cynical] Politicians are politicians expect them to say anything that will gain them votes. [/cynical]

View Post



But ID in itself doesn't point to any religion.

#8 Fred Williams

Fred Williams

    Administrator / Forum Owner

  • Admin Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2446 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Broomfield, Colorado
  • Interests:I enjoy going to Broncos games, my son's HS basketball & baseball games, and my daughter's piano & dance recitals. I enjoy playing basketball (when able). I occasionally play keyboards for my church's praise team. I am a Senior Staff Firmware Engineer at Micron, and am co-host of Real Science Radio.
  • Age: 52
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Broomfield, Colorado

Posted 08 August 2005 - 03:28 PM

IMO Bush is wrong.  ID or creation are not science and thus belong in a separate area of discussion, e.g. philosophy or comparative religion classes.

View Post


It depends on what you mean by "science". This is one of those claims that ends up being a waste of time. Virtually every creationist will tell you evolution is not science, and virtually every evolutionist will tell you creation is not science.

Fred

#9 chance

chance

    Veteran Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2029 posts
  • Age: 51
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Australia

Posted 08 August 2005 - 07:06 PM

The Debatinator

But ID in itself doesn't point to any religion.


The wording is carefully written to present that POV, but [cynic] I don’t believe that for an instant [/cynic]

The trouble with ID (amongst many) is that it’s a double edged sword favouring no one religion as you say, so if there is a push to include ID, and then draw logical conclusions from it, what will you conclude, what can you possibly conclude other than:

God,
Allah,
Aliens,
Etc,

It’s a very small list, yes?

And what then do you let every other competing idea also challenge evolution in the same way, YEC, OEC, numerous others, you can smell the litigation a mile away.

As I’ve mentioned before, science is not a democratic process, you can’t vote on the ‘theory’ you feel comfortable with. Let the scientists deal with the science, the educators to determine curriculum, if it’s wrong it won’t stay wrong for long, it will be corrected, that is how science works.



Fred Williams

It depends on what you mean by "science". This is one of those claims that ends up being a waste of time. Virtually every creationist will tell you evolution is not science, and virtually every evolutionist will tell you creation is not science.

True, we’ll leave the specifics for topics in the Creation/evolution section, and concentrate on the politics. To which I would have to ask:

Is Bush qualified in the sciences to make such statements? (in what arena in the educational frame work does he propose to have ID broached, science or philosophy)
Is he pandering to a political lobby?

#10 Geezer

Geezer

    Junior Member

  • Advanced member
  • PipPip
  • 72 posts
  • Age: 49
  • Judaism Orthodox
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • 3rd Rock from the Sun

Posted 09 August 2005 - 01:11 PM

Is Bush qualified in the sciences to make such statements? (in what arena in the educational frame work does he propose to have ID broached, science or philosophy)
Is he pandering to a political lobby?


You could as easily flip that around and ask is Dawkins qualified to make his comments on religion?
Anyone can make a comment/opinion without being qualified.

Of course Bush is pandering to a lobby. All high-profile figures are...like, say...Dawkins.

#11 chance

chance

    Veteran Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2029 posts
  • Age: 51
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Australia

Posted 09 August 2005 - 02:44 PM

You could as easily flip that around and ask is Dawkins qualified to make his comments on religion?
Anyone can make a comment/opinion without being qualified.

Of course Bush is pandering to a lobby. All high-profile figures are...like, say...Dawkins.

View Post


Of courses they can have an opinion. But is it a form of abuse given the influence the president has?

#12 Geezer

Geezer

    Junior Member

  • Advanced member
  • PipPip
  • 72 posts
  • Age: 49
  • Judaism Orthodox
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • 3rd Rock from the Sun

Posted 10 August 2005 - 06:50 AM

And how about folks like Dawkins? He wants religion eradicated and spouts his views voluminously.
The Prez is not campaigning for ID - he offered an opinion.

#13 The Debatinator

The Debatinator

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 198 posts
  • Age: 20
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Chicago, Illinois

Posted 10 August 2005 - 09:26 AM

Bush is trying to give balance. You act as if he is trying to silence evolution. Why do you pretend like you are standing up for free speech and free thought when all you are doing is silencing a thought?


"Why can't you change your ways and be a free thinker like me?"

- What I get from it.

#14 chance

chance

    Veteran Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2029 posts
  • Age: 51
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Australia

Posted 10 August 2005 - 02:15 PM

People in public office have a duty to act on the behalf of all the people, showing no favouritism (directly or indirectly).

IMO ones personal views should be kept private while in office. This curtesy should extend to the media also who should refrain from asking personal opinion. I know, I know....…. I’m living in dreamland.

#15 Geezer

Geezer

    Junior Member

  • Advanced member
  • PipPip
  • 72 posts
  • Age: 49
  • Judaism Orthodox
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • 3rd Rock from the Sun

Posted 10 August 2005 - 02:45 PM

Man, you are living in dreamland! :)

#16 RockerforChrist14

RockerforChrist14

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 123 posts
  • Age: 15
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Amity, Oregon

Posted 17 August 2005 - 10:55 PM

"People in public office have a duty to act on the behalf of all the people, showing no favouritism (directly or indirectly)."

Really! I wonder why all they teach in public schools is evolution?... No I would say evolution is not a science whatsoever and is based on the assumption that things happen and not observations. Bush was right I think. Actually, teaching creation in a public school is perfectly legal, it's just that the American Communist Lawyers Union will threaten to sue, and will sue, even though they'll lose the case, but the threat to makes the school back down and fire the teacher. Such an unbiased and fair, free country we live in.

#17 st_dissent

st_dissent

    Junior Member

  • Advanced member
  • PipPip
  • 61 posts
  • Interests:Physics, mathematics, astronomy, hiking, reading, and good conversation.
  • Age: 27
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • PLANET EARTH

Posted 19 August 2005 - 07:24 PM

Bush is trying to give balance.  You act as if he is trying to silence evolution.  Why do you pretend like you are standing up for free speech and free thought when all you are doing is silencing a thought?

View Post


Free speech and free thought are undoubtedly fundamental pillars to our country, however (I am sure you have heard this before) science is not democratic. As of this moment the mainstream science community is in overwhelming support of the TOE being the most probable explanation for the diversity of life on Earth. If we were to allow science to radically switch paradigms when a small fraction of its community offers little or no evidence of alternate explanations we wouldn’t have gotten very far. The fact that you agree with that small fraction does not make this attempt any more or less correct. All major scientific paradigm shifts of the past were the result of logical inferences made from available evidence. In our day and age the overwhelming majority of science professionals in relevant fields has drawn inferences from available evidence and has concluded that the TOE is most probable. Most of America’s populace is neither informed nor trained enough to offer any significant disagreements. In other words, it is very dangerous to allow a populace to “vote” on what they wish to be taught to their children as science.

It follows naturally that allowing alternate explanations to be taught alongside evolution gives the false impression that both explanations are on equal footing in the science community. This would be deceiving.

Now, it is apparent to me that the ID’s movement to install their arguments in a science classroom is an act of desperation. The only way to have a new scientific concept brought to a general science classroom is to provide evidence of this concept to the scientific community (not students in high school) that can hold its own and bring sway to the scientific establishment; thus far ID has failed to do so.

#18 st_dissent

st_dissent

    Junior Member

  • Advanced member
  • PipPip
  • 61 posts
  • Interests:Physics, mathematics, astronomy, hiking, reading, and good conversation.
  • Age: 27
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • PLANET EARTH

Posted 19 August 2005 - 07:54 PM

Really! I wonder why all they teach in public schools is evolution?... No I would say evolution is not a science whatsoever and is based on the assumption that things happen and not observations.

View Post


You are allowed to have that opinion; however the science community is who has to be convinced that you are right before ID can be put in a science class. Thus far the overwhelmingly largest majority of science professionals does not agree with you and absolutely does not consider ID and the TOE to be on equal footing. Until they do it is a disservice to the methodology of science to pretend that they are and allow both to be taught alongside one another in a science class. For now those in the ID movement will have to come up with enough hard evidence to convince scientists that the ID claims are substantial. If that evidence does exist the breakdown of the non-acceptance of ID as a valid scientific discipline will naturally follow upon its discovery; until then ID is just a wild goose chase.

Bush was right I think. Actually, teaching creation in a public school is perfectly legal, it's just that the American Communist Lawyers Union will threaten to sue, and will sue, even though they'll lose the case, but the threat to makes the school back down and fire the teacher. Such an unbiased and fair, free country we live in.

View Post


Politics aside I don’t know how you can believe that. Actually I do; however your vision is very narrow. You see it as perfectly legal because you believe it all to be true…creation and what not. For a moment allow yourself to imagine its not. What if we do allow the teaching of creationism in school…and it’s not correct? Then we allowed it on the basis of religion. For if it’s not correct then the majority of science professionals were right all along and we allowed popular opinion to hold sway in a biology classroom. Worse, allowing an action so severe reign in a public school that a variety of believers and non-believers contribute tax money to would be “respecting an establishment of religion”. You might try and get around this by promoting the so-called secular ID movement but as Chance already pointed out: The identity of the implied designer in the ID movement is a very small list.

All of this aside, I do believe (as any good Libertarian should) that those who do not wish to send his/her child to a government run school should be accredited a voucher that allows for a private school whose teachings are philosophically inline with what they believe.

#19 John Paul

John Paul

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 241 posts
  • Age: 44
  • Muslim
  • Creationist
  • Maynard, Massachusetts

Posted 15 September 2005 - 05:15 AM

SD:
Most of America’s populace is neither informed nor trained enough to offer any significant disagreements.


This is true with ID. It appears that very few people outside of ID understand what it is. That is obvious by reading the anti-ID literature. It is exactly for that reason, as well as our general curiosity, that ID needs to be taught in schools. It is also the only way to properly refute/ falsify a theory/ idea- discuss it publicly and see if it holds water.

But anyway I have written an essay as to why ID is scientific:

ID is scientific

#20 RockerforChrist14

RockerforChrist14

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 123 posts
  • Age: 15
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Amity, Oregon

Posted 17 September 2005 - 10:56 PM

"What if we do allow the teaching of creationism in school…and it’s not correct? Then we allowed it on the basis of religion. For if it’s not correct then the majority of science professionals were right all along and we allowed popular opinion to hold sway in a biology classroom. Worse, allowing an action so severe reign in a public school that a variety of believers and non-believers contribute tax money to would be “respecting an establishment of religion”

I could just change that first "creationism" to "evolution" and it would argue what you said just fine I think. Gasp, what if evolution that's being taught is wrong?... and it's all because of majority opinion, (in a certain group,) I could even take it as far as your religion point.
Gnight all.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users