Dr. Ben Carson speaks truth to Obama at prayer breakfast.

[rivergator]

Originally Posted by wygator

It's not simple disagreement that is intolerance, but the refusal to even permit a discussion.

You don't see the creationists trying to stop evolution from being taught, or demanding that evolutionists should be silenced.

No one is stopping your discussion here. As far as the classroom, yes it should be limited to science, not faith.

[QGator2414]

Originally Posted by rivergator

No one is stopping your discussion here. As far as the classroom, yes it should be limited to science, not faith.

Okay and science has proven we came from another species how?

And science has shown where that species we came from formed how?

[QGator2414]

Originally Posted by wygator

It's not simple disagreement that is intolerance, but the refusal to even permit a discussion.

You don't see the creationists trying to stop evolution from being taught, or demanding that evolutionists should be silenced.

Yep.

While I disagree with macro evolution or the idea we were once a monkey I do think micro evolution is happening...

That said I don't mind discussing it as I am fascinated by the belief of others...

[rivergator]

Originally Posted by QGator2414

Okay and science has proven we came from another species how?

And science has shown where that species we came from formed how?

We are not going to address or solve the entirety of biological sciences here. Suffice to say that science classes should teach the best that science has determined at that point.
Not faith. Not that woman was created from man's rib. Not that man and dinosaurs lived together. Or that unicorns were real. Not that the sun crosses the sky because Helios pulls it by a chariot.
The best that science has determined at the time.

[wygator]

Originally Posted by QGator2414

Yep.

While I disagree with macro evolution or the idea we were once a monkey I do think micro evolution is happening...

But when defining terms, it isn't microevolution that modern evolutionists are referring to.

Micro evolution is simply change within the genetic range of a species.

Darwin's famous finches changed beak sizes, colors, whatever. But at the end of the day, they were all still finches.

We've radiated fruit flies for generation after generation and created all manner of mutation. But they all remained flies.

For the most part, it's bait and switch. Think about it. The evolutionists give the examples of the finches and peppered moths, and then extrapolate that given enough time, those tiny changes will accumulate into entirely new animals.

[QGator2414]

Originally Posted by rivergator

We are not going to address or solve the entirety of biological sciences here. Suffice to say that science classes should teach the best that science has determined at that point.
Not faith. Not that woman was created from man's rib. Not that man and dinosaurs lived together. Or that unicorns were real. Not that the sun crosses the sky because Helios pulls it by a chariot.
The best that science has determined at the time.

What part of the theory of macroevolution gives you any confidence we came from some other species? What part of that theory gives you confidence that not only did we but this other species along with the rest of life came from a cell that started splitting? And in our case created two genders dependent on each other?

I am fine with science being taught. But science has not proven we came from another species so why can we not discuss the other plausible ideas?

[QGator2414]

Originally Posted by wygator

But when defining terms, it isn't microevolution that modern evolutionists are referring to.

Micro evolution is simply change within the genetic range of a species.

Darwin's famous finches changed beak sizes, colors, whatever. But at the end of the day, they were all still finches.

We've radiated fruit flies for generation after generation and created all manner of mutation. But they all remained flies.

For the most part, it's bait and switch. Think about it. The evolutionists give the examples of the finches and peppered moths, and then extrapolate that given enough time, those tiny changes will accumulate into entirely new animals.

Which is why it is so frustrating we cannot discuss ID...

IMO people are just fearful of it. Why I do not know? But IMO if you think about it ID makes more sense...

[WESGATORS]

The problem with Creationism taught in a science classroom is primarily due to it's lack of falsifiability. If there is no evidence that you could accept that would suggest something is wrong, then that something has no business in a science class.

However we got here, there's a method to it. Whether that is evolution or something else, the method is what is relevant to a science class. Creation without a proposed analyzable method has nothing to do with science.

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

[WESGATORS]

Originally Posted by QGator2414

I am fine with science being taught. But science has not proven we came from another species so why can we not discuss the other plausible ideas?

How would you craft a curriculum to include Creation? How much time would you dedicate to it and what would be the science related to its discussion? Let's try to establish the details of what it is we would like included in a science class (or link to another location if this has already been established).

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

[QGator2414]

Originally Posted by WESGATORS

The problem with Creationism taught in a science classroom is primarily due to it's lack of falsifiability. If there is no evidence that you could accept that would suggest something is wrong, then that something has no business in a science class.

However we got here, there's a method to it. Whether that is evolution or something else, the method is what is relevant to a science class. Creation without a proposed analyzable method has nothing to do with science.

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

It seems then we can start teaching we did not come from another species based on science then...

[QGator2414]

Originally Posted by WESGATORS

How would you craft a curriculum to include Creation? How much time would you dedicate to it and what would be the science related to its discussion? Let's try to establish the details of what it is we would like included in a science class (or link to another location if this has already been established).

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

It is a fair point but as wy was getting at evolution is taught deceptively IMO. We could start with a focus on separating macro and micro evolution maybe...

[rivergator]

Originally Posted by QGator2414

Which is why it is so frustrating we cannot discuss ID...

IMO people are just fearful of it. Why I do not know? But IMO if you think about it ID makes more sense...

No, we're not fearful of intelligent design. But science is about what we know. Intelligent design just claims that every we don't know "Uh, God did it."
That's not science. That's faith. Religion/science. Not the same thing.

[WESGATORS]

Originally Posted by QGator2414

It seems then we can start teaching we did not come from another species based on science then...

Maybe the curriculum has changed, but I was taught that evolution is the strongest available theory not that it was a matter of fact. The idea being, "we think this is how it went, but we're open to alternatives that we can analyze or reasons that we can refute any part of the theory."

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

[QGator2414]

Originally Posted by rivergator

No, we're not fearful of intelligent design. But science is about what we know. Intelligent design just claims that every we don't know "Uh, God did it."
That's not science. That's faith. Religion/science. Not the same thing.

And what do we know? Do we know we came from another species? Do we know species actually mutate into another species?

[oragator1]

Originally Posted by QGator2414

And what do we know? Do we know we came from another species? Do we know species actually mutate into another species?

Honest question, have you looked at the science behind fossil records and evolution?

[QGator2414]

Originally Posted by WESGATORS

Maybe the curriculum has changed, but I was taught that evolution is the strongest available theory not that it was a matter of fact. The idea being, "we think this is how it went, but we're open to alternatives that we can analyze or reasons that we can refute any part of the theory."

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

That is just it. The theory has basically proven we did not come from another species. Micro evolution is a different story...

[WESGATORS]

Originally Posted by QGator2414

It is a fair point but as wy was getting at evolution is taught deceptively IMO. We could start with a focus on separating macro and micro evolution maybe...

I don't agree with his assessment of how evolution is taught; at least, that's not how it was taught for me. The changes that we see with micro-evolution at the very least have to make you ask, what the limit is, right?

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

[QGator2414]

Originally Posted by oragator1

Honest question, have you looked at the science behind fossil records and evolution?

In depth no. Skimmed the topic once (brought on by a too hot thread) once in the last year (maybe two as time is hard to remember with a 4 year old, two year old and baby due Monday) looking at both sides.

[WESGATORS]

Originally Posted by QGator2414

The theory has basically proven we did not come from another species.

I think I missed something here. What theory has proven this?

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

[Row6]

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolib...ticle/lines_01