truthsayer's tags:
truthsayer's most popular posts:
truthsayer reads (120):
Who's reading truthsayer (105):

Exciting Times In The COSMIC CAFE

truthsayer posted on May 15, 2008 | views: 562 | Tags: history, education, Truth, future, Science, politics, religion, wow, CREATION

As curmudgeon said in one of his blogs recently, these are exciting times that we are living in, aren't they? For the first time in a long time, I see some balance coming back into our thinking. I see creation scientists, whether creation evolutionists, or young earth creationists, having lively and healthy debates and discussions.

I see athiest evolutionists and Darwinists taking a good hard look at their former beliefs; whether they share these explorations with the public or not, we know that many of them are saying that their integrity is urging them to examine the facts and data again. They have private discussions amongst themselves too. If they know that they can trust that person to keep their doubts or questioning in confidence.

In education, I see the public schools wondering where their students have gone; asking themselves why so many students are leaving for private schools, Christian or not, and why home-schooling is ever increasing. They get paid by a head count. More students mean more funds.

I have a suggestion for the public school system of the United States of America. Teach all three theories in science classes: Creationist Theory (with both the young earth and creation evolution science), The Theory of Intelligent Design, and The Theory Evolution, or Darwinism. Good persuasion in human communication theory holds that we must teach all possibilities to be truly persuasive. Let the students decide what they believe.

The same is true for history. Teach what the revisionist historians say is our true history as a nation AND teach what our historians said before the revisionists came on the scene in the mid 1900's. Read the actual documents, in their totality, about our founding fathers. How can it hurt the students of America to know the truth about our history?

Would you hide from them the truth about the revisionists as well? Why did they feel that they needed to change the way we look at and teach our nation's history? Is their argument valid? Is it worth hiding their truth from our nation's students? Is this another case for Jack Nicholson to act out on the silver screen for us? Can we not "handle the truth"?

So, can we handle the truth? Teach both sides, all sides of an issue. Expand their minds. Make them think things through for themselves, with all of the arguments, data and facts at hand. Let them know the truth of our debates...our heartfelt truths that each of us must live by; and maybe, just maybe, we will have another generation of brilliant minds, innovative thinkers, warriors for truth that are willing to fight for our rights, our nation, our way of life and the victory of truth.

I close with a link to a speech given by Thomas Paine, truly one of the very least religious of our founding fathers in which he admonishes the French for teaching science much as we teach it today, in America. In this, the country the founding fathers fought to birth for us.

The truth of our history and our understanding of science, is wooing our return to it...after decades of our infedelity, our lack of wisdom has resulted in vacant hallways in our public schools, and vacant minds that would yearn to be filled with truth, if they knew how their creativity would explode and revolutionize the world.

Here is the link. Please, make the time to read it. It matters. Everything that is true, matters.

http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=81

As always think-babies, I humbly offer this for discussion. Be real. Be fearless. Seek the truth, for only it can set you free. Seek wisdom, and she will make her home with you and show you treasures of the deep, that only she can reveal to you.

Your fellow think-baby,

Truthsayer



send to a friend del.icio.us Digg reddit StumbleUpon

Comments

  • truthsayer said on May 15, 2008....

    Here's a link to the blog by curmudgeon that I mentioned in the first paragraph.

    http://www.soulcast.com/post/show/130518/Professor-Melds-Faith-and-Psychotherapy

    Thanks folks. Enjoy!

    Truthsayer

  • truthsayer said on May 15, 2008....

    You might want to refresh this discussion by reading over one of my Cosmic Cafe blogs, where recently lfbno7 added some new links on the subject of The Big Bang, as well. I know I haven't written much on my Cosmic Cafe blogs lately...but I should have. I hope my old friends beyondtheveil, curmudgeon, mobil, alieNated, lfbno7 and SeanRenaud will stop in again. If only for a slice of Truth Pie. : )

    Here's the link to the past ; )

    http://www.soulcast.com/post/show/65560/The-Cosmic-Cafe%3A--Big-Bang---Cosmology-%233

  • lfbno7 said on May 15, 2008....
    Our schools refuse to teach intelligent design because they consider it a tool for the religious right to get its foot in the door, and they don't want religion taught in school. If it were up to me, I'd teach it all. I'd explore revisionist history too. I'd like to see the mind of America opened.
  • truthsayer said on May 15, 2008....
    Me too lfbno7. It would make my life so much easier. Did you know that it was our very religious forefathers that started the public schools? Now that's an irony, isn't it? Thanks for stopping in lfbno7. Hey, what does your "name" mean anyway? If you don't mind my asking. : )
  • truthsayer said on May 15, 2008....
    Aristotle who is often associated with 'the scientific method' should also be associated with Intelligent Design. Teleology was probably the first philosophical declaration of Intelligent Design, wasn't it?
  • pickersplock said on May 15, 2008....
    Most of the problem with today's schools are, they don't teach thinking, and learning, and seeking.  No common sense!
    Oh sure, kids can rattle off facts, but there's more to survival than memorizing facts!
    That being said, why not present all sides of the arguement and allow kids to decide for themselves?
    Well, done Truth.
    I respect and appreciate the seeker, much more than the know it all!
  • truthsayer said on May 15, 2008....
    Wow. I hope others think like you. I'd like to see things change for our children in America pickersplock. Thanks for stopping in here. Hey, I don't want to distract from my own blog, but I have another Memo from Truthsayer to write that I think you'll like. I'll wait a few more hours and see how this one is doing before I write it. It is funny though, and I want to get a little bit of time between the serious one and the funny one. Blessings oh ye hilarious writer YOU. May I never be a "know it all" in your eyes. Truthsayer : )
  • Lucytorial said on May 15, 2008....
    what a huge topic.... this will be long winded I'm afraid.

    I see where this stems from and I agree to a finite point.  That which he is saying about the origins is one school of thought, there are many religions, how will this be taught in school? there isn't one line of faith, its simply too hard to determine which religion will be taught?? come on really, I agree teach it all but at the end of the day what are we teaching?

    We can in a limited time frame - the schooling years - as pickers says teach them a broad view and let them decide again I come back to what? is it only going to be Christianity? what about Taoism, what about hinduism, what about muslism, what about all of the other religions with as much if not more history than chistianity.

    I'm not anti religious, you know that truth but there comes a point when one must think about the logistics of it all.

    I think it would serve humanity better if we started teaching children to ask more questions, seek more answers themselves, learn about the true meaning of being a human being in todays world, not yesteryear, but today, tomorrow they will be making decisions for us, leaving their mark. Any child growing up with a secular or singular view of the world is not going to do justice to the world itself or humanity, a limited perspective is not helpful, more a hindrance than anything else.

    If we limit ourselves to a particular comfort zone then we rarely get to see the bigger picture, opening up this discussion for our children is probably a fabulous start and I would say ask them? what would they like? I'll tell you now they want the truth! but who's truth? its up to them.

  • Expendable said on May 15, 2008....
    And it was our very religious forefathers who decided religion didn't belong in school too. The Puritans left England to come to the savage America because of persecution for their beliefs, which is why they decided to do keep religion separate.
     
    But if you teach one creationist therory, wouldn't you have to teach them all? There are several - and none of them are on the standardized federal tests except for evolution.
     
    Schools, critically short of money, wind up having to teach to the demands of "No Child Left Behind" or lose more funding.
  • Lucytorial said on May 15, 2008....
    My main problem with intelligent design is that it was created by Christian apologists... this is not really what I would call and open and fair axis point to discuss this interesting take on life....
  • Lucytorial said on May 15, 2008....
    okay here is a link, its an interesting discussion.  Long but interesting...
  • truthsayer said on May 15, 2008....

    I understand what you are getting at Lucy. I am speaking of the three major theories of our origins as living beings on this planet. Muslims, Jews and Christians have the same creation stories. Taoists don't get into it, other than to say that before all that is, was the Tao, the ever existent, self existent One. Sound familiar? Even the Chinese have a story of a great flood and it has a character called Noah, as being an ancestor of theirs.

    Teleology was a phrase from the times of Aristotle, who was not a Christian of course. That may be what we would call the origins of Intelligent Design ; ) I know that is what people say...that it was started by a bunch of Christians. But that isn't really true. Unless Jesus paid a visit to Aristotle that I am not aware of : )

    As far as history goes, this country was founded by Christians, but the popular theories about the people that came here so long ago, the Puritans, is not correct. They never ever intended for their to be a separation of church and state. Only that there never be a national religion that was mandatory for all to accept and practice, by law...like the church of England. They didn't want one denomination of Christianity to become chosen and mandatory. If they had wanted that, chances are we would ALL be Episcopalians ; )

    I shall have to hunt down my research on the first public schools, which the first settlers started in this country. The only curriculum they required was the Holy Bible.

    The forefathers didn't require the Jewish people to convert to Christianity (any denomination), and they didn't require the Muslims to convert either...even though they were the first ones that America went to war with internationally...in a Naval capacity. That's an interesting piece of history in and of itself.

    I was longer winded than you were I suspect Lucytorial! We shall see when I push this "Submit comment" button! But you are right, it is a huge topic and I would like to see this country's text book writers come up to the challenge. It really isn't that hard. We do it at a college level...although academia is extremely biased as is our entire education system. Publish or perish, that is the cry of the professors. Just try to get your studies and articles published if it is outside of the established and accepted "norms".

    That's the last of this treatise/comment ; ) Thanks for stimulating that discussion Lucy.

    Truthsayer

    : )
  • truthsayer said on May 15, 2008....
    Oh my!!! I really erred. I combined my response to Expendable into my response to Lucytorial! I am so sorry Expendable. I hope the two of you can read through that and find my response to each of you! Thank you both so much for commenting. I really appreciate it. Don't stop on my account though. Work it out with each other too, if you all would like to. Gotta go eat. I'll be back later friends. Great discussion though. Truthsayer : )
  • Lucytorial said on May 15, 2008....
    I understood it all... now I'm going to make fun because I come from a country founded by convicts! tehehehee

    I understand the platform Truth, however intelligent design was created by Christians, its flavour is Christianity, I don't agree with a singular view point...oh and Taoism.. that was funny! lol I shy away from any fundamental views even if they are based in science, I don't feel the need to explain everything in the world, its not really important to me.

    Personally if I were to include god in this conversation I would say that I am here so he can live life through me, I am not so much here because of him as he is here because of me.. if you understand that.

    When I'm feeling like now (good mood) I don't understand why we need to define shit! shit is shit, if you like eating it then eat it, some don't some smell like shit, others think their shit don't stink, personally its just shit to me, a part of a greater whole, shit wouldn't be shit unless it went through some crazy process to become shit.  its still shit. 

    {{sorry truth, you can delete this if you want, I'm being devils advocate in a nice way, no harm meant}}
  • fearing said on May 15, 2008....
    Hi Truth, I like this type of post.   Good one too!  Of course I think Creation should be taught also.   If someone can buy all those other "theories" I don't get how creation is so unbelievable. 

    Hugs!

  • bloc said on May 15, 2008....
    "Good persuasion in human communication theory holds that we must teach all possibilities to be truly persuasive. Let the students decide what they believe."

    I have numerous disagreements with this as I'm sure all of you can guess :) first, what kind of class are we talking about? If we're talking about science class then why should we teach things that aren't science. Shouldn't something have to have real science behind it to be taught in a science class. We can argue all day about ID, but young earth beliefs have no solid footing of any kind! The idea that this should be taught in science class is frankly absurd. 

    Second, the idea that "all possibilities" need to be told is impractical if not impossible. Where does it end? Do our science classes also need to teach hindu beliefs, native american beliefs, greek mythology, lfb's beliefs, and any other hair brained idea more than 100 people believe? 
  • RollingC said on May 15, 2008....
    Hello Truth... what a deep topic that you've touched upon.  I've grown up in different countries and the difference of the school system here and in other countries is striking. 
    Like night and day.
    I never could figure out why ( I got my own theory now but it's just my own thoughts) and I've always noticed the disparity (?) between here and abroad...I'm talking mainly about the early years of schooling for children.  In other countries they drill you like a military machine and schools in some countries in South America require you to take a second and third  language while in High School.
    Here it's fairly easy at the beginning and get's harder and more demanding as you go to university and choose your career.   But the early years here are a piece of cake compared to other countries.
    They should definitely teach creation....amongst other things....that will help children adapt better and faster to life as they get older.
     
    That's just my humble opinion.
     
    Rc
  • lfbno7 said on May 15, 2008....
    I tend to go back to beginnings and re-examine basics. I'd fundamentally change school. It can't be perfect as it is. Nothing else is. I'd want school to accomplish different things than it is now accomplishing.

    One of the main purposes of school today is to teach children how to read and write and do some math and know some of this and that. It's a worthwhile goal but I think school can accomplish more.

    I'd like to see the school system help people more than it presently does in their future lives. I'd like to see a much stronger connection between the school system and the working world. I'd like to see the day when every student leaves school on the fast track to a profession he has already gotten into the front door on.

    We already do it in athletics. The most talented athletes have offers, and have been trained in the sport. But what about the average kid out of school? Some do, some don't. I'd like to see that percentage improved, so that when a kid is done with school, at the high school or college level, he is already well on his way, he already has offers for entry level jobs, he already has experience in a few fields and knows what they consist of. He already has Possibilities. It's not just "okay, you graduated kid, now what are you gonna do?"

    I have no problem with offering courses that just explore questions that interest philosophers. A course here or there to make you think, for no other reason than to make you think. An elective. Such a course could discuss the origins of life, the various religions, and so on. Not every course needs to be aimed at developing a specific ability. Some courses can be aimed at just developing the mind.

    And courses like this can be offered not only to children, but for continuing education to adults. It could be part of the American (or whatever country) experience that people frequently take courses either for professional advancement or just for their own interest, and not too expensively either, easily affordable. We're already doing it but we can do it better.
  • skald said on May 16, 2008....
    Truth.  I don't know anything about your school system. I think that the education of a nation is the nations wealth.

    Children and adults too should get the broadest education possible. If you have a view over a vast field you will hopefully become more broad minded.

    They should be educated about religion. Not only Christianity  but other religions too like Hindu, Muslin and so on. It might give us a  start to begin to understand each other.
    I have heard that in the US you get little news of anything that goes on somewhere else in the word. I don't  know, I not in the U,S,. I also understand that it is such a vast country It is really a continent.
    Well this is my add to your conversation.
  • ALIENated said on May 16, 2008.... 
    
This sort of discussion unearths, once again, the reasons that schools have
probably chosen to remove religion from our schools. As I understand it, the
Jehovah's Witnesses were more instrumental than anyone for getting prayer
and religious teaching removed from our schools. They have a form of 
religion and they do not want their children taught otherwise. The only
alternative is to remove your kids from the public, government schools. They
are now little more than training grounds for the liberal left agenda. Religion
is just the tip of the iceberg. They are also rushing to teach our children
that it is OK for Tommy to have two dads or two moms. The main children
being taught in government schools today are the children of illegals, Asians,
blacks, and Middleeasterns. All potential atheist Democrats. We deserve what
we stand for, which is true on many fronts, like California, where judges have
now overturned the will of the people. A country that turns its back on God
will not be a country for long. If our schools taught stuff like history instead
of the gay agenda, Californians might understand that our days as a country
are numbered because of the actions their court has taken. We can only
hope that God does not judge our whole country instead of California only.
If California drops off into the ocean, we will know His answer. Even then,
atheists will think it is an event that proves Al Gwhore right, and not the
Bible.
  • bloc said on May 16, 2008....
    @lfb
    "I'd like to see the day when every student leaves school on the fast track to a profession he has already gotten into the front door on. "

    I think a lot of other countries do it this way. 

    @alien
    "A country that turns its back on God will not be a country for long."
    Yeah, like japan which is heavily buddhist. I mean japan has just crumbled for turning it's back on God. LOL
  • SeanRenaud said on May 16, 2008....
    1.  I won't debate why intelegent design and Creationism cannot and should not be taught in schools.  It's been done to death.
     
    Revisionist history is just as dangerous.  Teach both sides?  There aren't two sides not really.  Are we honestly going to teach our children that the holocaust didn't happen?  I mean if you're not a history expert a lot of the facts and figures can be twisted to make it seem like just that.
     
     
  • Eilan said on May 16, 2008....
    I'm not sure what part of "intelligent design is not science" is so difficult to comprehend.

    I'd homeschool my children before I allowed them to be submitted to ID in a science class or any attempt to bring the Christian god--or any other deity, for that matter--into the classroom.  That's what church is for.


  • SeanRenaud said on May 16, 2008....
    Exactly, there is no controversy, none at all.  At least not amongst the educated.
     
    What's rather frightening is that there is a very clear relationship between religion and standard of living.  It is an inverse one. 
  • somethingunUSual said on May 16, 2008....
  • Expendable said on May 16, 2008....
    I think it's enough to tell students that some believe differently and let the students go off to learn for themselves. But I think the offical Army report on "Investigation Report on the Life in a German Extermination Camp (Kz Natzweiler) and the Atrocities Committed There. 1941-1944" should be read verbatum.
     
    As far as Intelligent Design goes, if God created both the World and Man, and as we're discovering that being homosexual is biological rather than a 'lifestyle choice', that means God intentionally created some to be homosexual and to deny them is to defy God's will.
  • bloc said on May 16, 2008....
    I'm always amazed when people insist that things which are science should be taught in a science class. Like I said before, the ID issue has been argued to death, but the notion that science classes should teach young earth delusions is insanity in my opinion.

    Also, as has been said many times but not answered by those that want to teach christianity in science classes, why are these demands always limited to christian beliefs? If any idea, no matter how demonstrably false, should be taught if more than 100 believe it, then we will no longer be teaching science in science classes.
  • bloc said on May 16, 2008....

    "I am writing you with much concern after having read of your hearing to decide whether the alternative theory of Intelligent Design should be taught along with the theory of Evolution. I think we can all agree that it is important for students to hear multiple viewpoints so they can choose for themselves the theory that makes the most sense to them. I am concerned, however, that students will only hear one theory of Intelligent Design.

    Let us remember that there are multiple theories of Intelligent Design. I and many others around the world are of the strong belief that the universe was created by a Flying Spaghetti Monster. It was He who created all that we see and all that we feel. We feel strongly that the overwhelming scientific evidence pointing towards evolutionary processes is nothing but a coincidence, put in place by Him.

    It is for this reason that I’m writing you today, to formally request that this alternative theory be taught in your schools, along with the other two theories. In fact, I will go so far as to say, if you do not agree to do this, we will be forced to proceed with legal action. I’m sure you see where we are coming from. If the Intelligent Design theory is not based on faith, but instead another scientific theory, as is claimed, then you must also allow our theory to be taught, as it is also based on science, not on faith.

    Some find that hard to believe, so it may be helpful to tell you a little more about our beliefs. We have evidence that a Flying Spaghetti Monster created the universe. None of us, of course, were around to see it, but we have written accounts of it. We have several lengthy volumes explaining all details of His power. Also, you may be surprised to hear that there are over 10 million of us, and growing. We tend to be very secretive, as many people claim our beliefs are not substantiated by observable evidence. What these people don’t understand is that He built the world to make us think the earth is older than it really is. For example, a scientist may perform a carbon-dating process on an artifact. He finds that approximately 75% of the Carbon-14 has decayed by electron emission to Nitrogen-14, and infers that this artifact is approximately 10,000 years old, as the half-life of Carbon-14 appears to be 5,730 years. But what our scientist does not realize is that every time he makes a measurement, the Flying Spaghetti Monster is there changing the results with His Noodly Appendage. We have numerous texts that describe in detail how this can be possible and the reasons why He does this. He is of course invisible and can pass through normal matter with ease.

    I’m sure you now realize how important it is that your students are taught this alternate theory."

    more
  • SeanRenaud said on May 16, 2008....
    I've always loved that chart proving the relationship of pirates to global warming.  Jack Sparrow save us!
  • truthsayer said on May 16, 2008....

    Wow folks. This is quite a display of comments. First, I shall address the "naysayers"...the ones for the status quo:

    I see that some object to creationism whether it has a scientific model or not. I see that people have ignored telelogy completely, obviously because it became a part of our human culture far before Jesus was on the scene...and that kind of blows the "Jesus Freaks" thought it up "argument".

    Yeah, maybe we should have bumper stickers made that say "Aristotle Sucks" and "Down With Teleology"...or "Don't Think & Don't Read Philosophy!"...even though it is the root study of what we call science, today! In fact, Aristotle himself could be here, without any knowledge of, or relationship to Jesus Christ, and you would throw your garbage at him for telling you that people have the right and the responsibility to THINK!!!

    Not to simply memorize lists that you give them, that will never help them to believe in themselves, in creativity, in innovation and inspiration...you would not want them to wonder, or let them be amazed at this beautiful creation or design of the earth, and you would not want them (green spaghetti monster forbid) to wonder at the being, the One that created everything.

    No, you want to believe that left alone, for long enough, all of the elements of a watch, under just the right conditions, would eventually SPRING INTO EXISTENCE, combining ITSELF into a perfect functioning system and even come ALIVE! Please. Somebody wake me up from this nightmare...this closed system that cannot believe in anyone or anything but themselves, and one or two others....maybe.

    I wish Aristotle was here, AND Socrates. I think they would laugh at what our "Great Thinkers" have become. I think they would want to go back to a time when greatness was still allowed. Not this worship of mediocrity. I am ashamed of us.

    I see that there are a lot of commenters that like the education system just the way it is, and they want more of the prescription drugs that we call education, to be administered in larger doses, and with more choices of ways that kids today can numb their brains. I find this close mindedness to be a warning of things to come. Kind of prophetic.

    You don't want children in schools to think for themselves. You want them to think what you think. You are afraid to tell them the truth about our history, about science as a discipline, about innovation and brilliance. You just want to put them into your little square pegs and get standardized. How pitiful.

    To BLOC and Sean:

    I am addressing this part to you. I think your shoulders are broad enough to handle it.

    Thank you for your sane responses. I know that you have disagreements with what I said. My one wish would be that you and others that tend to lump everything into a religious context, would stop it.

    I said several times, quite clearly, that I am speaking primarily of SCIENCE CLASSES, which teach the Theory of Evolution, ONLY. And as far as HISTORY goes, I am obviously speaking of AMERICAN HISTORY.

    It is sad that no matter what I say, this topic always seems to degenerate to the level of a food fight. That's about all that reminds me of schools or what we still call "education".

    I haven't read the blog dedicated to me yet written by somethingunUSual, but I will. If only to be polite. But you can bet that I won't call him or her an idiot. Anyway, that person and that blog illustrates exactly what I am talking about, RE: Food Fight...instead of discussion.

    This is why Sean, that it's all been "done to death." People refuse to listen, really listen to the people that disagree with them. Like Eilan, most of you want the public schools for yourselves. There wouldn't be Christian evangelism going on in the classroom...although there clearly has been in our schools back in the day.

    But you won't even present all three theories, models, etc. You want to stop the free thinking before it starts. You must be afraid that some of the kids might start questioning the status quo.

    I have always taught others, the way that I was taught. I encourage their critical questions. I am a Christian, but I can understand what athiest and humanist philosophers are saying. I can understand what you two, and most others are saying.

    Eilan, do you realize by what you said, that you could not let your children take a philosophy class??? They discuss the existence of God as one of the greater debates of all time! Christians have to read ALL of the philosophers. Athiests and secular humanists have to read ALL of the philosophers. AND come to an understanding of what that philisopher is saying, what they believe and why they believe it. There are no food fights in philosophy class. But one can certainly receive an F.

    Or would you just remove God from philosophy too?

    I have no problem telling my students that this is what a particular "people group" see, perceive, what they believe to be true, etc...when I teach. I am perfectly capable of teaching other points of view with respect.

    I simply present the information, and yes, I may share which theory I tend towards, and why I believe as I do...but I also tell them that what I believe to be true isn't what matters...it is WHAT THEY DO, to decide, what THEY BELIEVE TO BE TRUE. They are still tested on their understanding of the theory as the adherants of that theory present it.

    I have no fear. But I have help with that, that maybe you, and others don't have. I am secure in looking at opposing points of view. I enjoy looking at opposing points of view. I respect the work that all scientists have done; except those that lie, cheat or deceive for their own gain...whether it is for attention or other type of personal or professional gain.

    So, I also thank pickersplock, fearing, lfbno7, skald, ALIENated, and Expendable. I apologize to anyone that thought I would ever suggest teaching that the holocaust didn't happen. That is absurd and wicked to say the least. I am not sure where that got started in this blog, but I condemn it and anyone that says it.

    I think I should have started another blog dedicated to wrapping this up, instead of this comment that is longer than the blog. I just put all of my responses together into one long comment. I hope you can read it. I am still on an older computer and this it takes a lot of html! I just didn't want to do a bunch of them to everyone. : )

    I thank you all. I have learned a lot. Even from my adversaries. It's been almost 24 hours, and it won't be on the front page for much longer...so, THANK YOU ONE AND ALL. You have proven that these are truly EXCITING TIMES to be alive!

    Blessings to all who will truly receive them,

    Truthsayer

  • truthsayer said on May 16, 2008....

    Double Wow. I guess you all were busy as little evolutionary bees while I thought I would wrap it up ; ) Go on folks. Don't mind me. I am thoroughly enjoying this exchange. Rock on.

    By the way, I have a question for you folks. Haven't you ever taken a college class where they teach you a ton of theories, many which oppose each other, and the students are expected to learn all of them? Have a working knowledge...maybe not a deep working knowledge...but enough to be tested on them?

    I mean, it isn't like the students are entering seminary. But then again, there are disagreements in Christianity, prophecy, etc. There are even...well, I hate to burst your bubble...but there are even disagreements between evolutionists/Darwinists. ; ) I know it isn't supposed to be allowed in the scientific community...if you don't have something nice to say about evolution, don't say anything at all ; )

    Like I said, double wow. : )

    Truth

  • SeanRenaud said on May 16, 2008....
    1.  As I re-read the original blog you are right that you were speaking of American history.  Of course to that I say the same thing that I say to people about why we don't spend more time teaching African history in our schools.  Its largely irrellevant  to how we came to be where we are today.  European history is American history much of our culture is directly rooted in theirs.  Not to mention World War 2 is our history.  What possible reason could you give for not teaching the Holocaust didn't happen right along with the idea that it did?  There are enough people who believe that, entire countries in fact deny it to this day.  Have you ever sat down with and discussed at length the arguments against the Holocaust?  Truth is that all but the most knowledgable would be able to debate many of these people. 
     
    Do we teach that September 11, 2001 a group of radical Muslim extremists hijacked four planes, flew two into the Twin towers, a third into the Pentagon and a fourth crashed before reaching it's target, the White House. 
     
    Or was it Bush's fault.
     
    If your point is what it seems to be, open discussion with all sides of a debate given fair table time how do you justify not teaching that the Holocaust is a Zionist myth created for the soul purpose of guilting the world into the creation of Isreal and then let the children decide?  Why not the same thing for 9/11. 
     
    Why limit revisionist history to just the US?
     
    2.  Science has clear parameters and neither ID nor Creationism meat those requirements.  The watchmaker comparison is really a stupid one anyway.  If I saw watch I'd say wow this thing is really complex and couldn't possibly have come about on its own.  If I break a watch it stays broke (unless I fix it).  Living things seem to have this habit of fixing themselves.
     
    What's more is you are pulling the common Creationist tactic of mixing apples and oranges where it suits you.  You mention the incredulity of the right mixture of elements spontaneously becoming alive.  But Evolution doesn't say that.  Evolution says that simple life forms become more complex life forms over time.  It makes no different to Evolution as a theory wether a lightning in a bottle created the first life forms, or wether Four Elephants balancing on the back of a turtle holding up the world sneezed.  Or if Doc Brown went back to the dawn of time and intentionally set loose bacteria, or even if Allah created say every life form 65 million years ago and let them run rampant.  Attacking Biogenesis is at best a dishonest way to disprove Evolution and probably an out right lie.
     
    3.  It's funny that you think it's absurd for life to spontaneously form but you have no problem with an all powerful all knowing being spontaneously forming.
  • bloc said on May 16, 2008....
    @truth
    "Yeah, maybe we should have bumper stickers made that say "Aristotle Sucks" and "Down With Teleology"...or "Don't Think & Don't Read Philosophy!"...even though it is the root study of what we call science"

    Saying that science grew out of philosophy is very different from saying that science is philosophy and that philosophy should be taught in science classes. you are saying the former, but implying the later.

    "I said several times, quite clearly, that I am speaking primarily of SCIENCE CLASSES, which teach the Theory of Evolution, ONLY."

    What do you mean by only here? Do you mean a class that is about nothing but the subject of evolution (i.e. not a general biology class or whatever), or do you mean a classes that teaches evolution as the only explanation of the diverse life we see on earth?

    "But you won't even present all three theories, models, etc. You want to stop the free thinking before it starts. "

    You chastise us for not listening to the other side while you do the same. First, there are far more than three theories unless the only theories you care about are christian ones and evolution which you are forced to take. You also fail to answer why a science class should teach something that is fundamentally unscientific like young earth theory. If the young earth theory should be taught then why not the flying spaghetti monster theory? Why not hinduism? Why not buddhism? Why not the thousands other ideas that have absolutely no scientific basis?

    Here's the question I'd like to get a straight answer to. Why should a science class teach something that has no scientific evidence of any kind? And if it should, where does it end? Why is it only christian theories that you wish to impose? And once every imposes their own pet theory will there be any time left to learn any science?

    "I apologize to anyone that thought I would ever suggest teaching that the holocaust didn't happen. That is absurd and wicked to say the least. I am not sure where that got started in this blog, but I condemn it and anyone that says it."

    Because it's a theory that a lot of people believe and by your logic it should be taught even if it has no basis in factual evidence!

    But seriously, if you want to chastise me for not listening to the other side then lead by example and show me that you've considered my questions.




  • ALIENated said on May 17, 2008.... 
    
"Also, as has been said many times but not answered by those that want to teach christianity in science classes, why are these demands always limited to christian beliefs? If any idea, no matter how demonstrably false, should be taught if more than 100 believe it, then we will no longer be teaching science in science classes."

I am not sure anyone wants to teach Christianity in science classes. The main
problem is that atheism (there is no God) is the norm in government schools now.
That is probably because atheism is fast becoming the norm in the world. Anyone
that knows anything about Christianity, God, and the Bilble understands why. 
Christians want children to be exposed to the things of God and the sciences of
the world, but most children today will perish for lack of knowledge. Most
children today will perish in the lake of fire because they were never exposed to
the truth of the times we are now living in. We Christians call this the end time.
Those who would bar God from the government schools are simply bringing about
that in which they do not believe. Ironic, is it not?
  • ALIENated said on May 17, 2008.... 
    
"Also, as has been said many times but not answered by those that want to teach
christianity in science classes, why are these demands always limited to christian
beliefs? If any idea, no matter how demonstrably false, should be taught if more than
100 believe it, then we will no longer be teaching science in science classes."

I am not sure anyone wants to teach Christianity in science classes. The main
problem is that atheism (there is no God) is the norm in government schools now.
That is probably because atheism is fast becoming the norm in the world. Anyone
that knows anything about Christianity, God, and the Bilble understands why. 
Christians want children to be exposed to the things of God and the sciences of
the world, but most children today will perish for lack of knowledge. Most
children today will perish in the lake of fire because they were never exposed to
the truth of the times we are now living in. We Christians call this the end time.
Those who would bar God from the government schools are simply bringing about
that in which they do not believe. Ironic, is it not?
  • pickersplock said on May 17, 2008....
    I can't believe you would compare the major religions of the world to the flying spaghetti monster, Bloc.
     
    I'm very happy to say, that our children are learning all about the major religions of the world, and about Greek and Roman Mythology.
     
    Now, you can't have a science class without mentioning why it was so controversial to say that the planets revolved around the sun instead of the earth.
    I would also think it difficult, to discuss evolution without acknowledging the Scopes Monkey trial, and you can't talk about that without bringing up the reasons for it in the first place.
     
    It's part of our history, and you can't fully understand a subject without learning it's history.
     
  • bloc said on May 17, 2008....
    btw, the line going of the screen is due to the way you compose your post and comments. I'm guessing you write it in Word or something then paste it in to SC. This causes SC to add a formatting tag to it that tells the site to render it exactly as it's typed. When someone copies and pastes your comments you get the lines going off the screen. I know how to manually strip that out when I copy and paste your comments ...

    I'm not sure what my point it, just pointing out the cause of that :)


  • bloc said on May 17, 2008....
    @pickers
    I'm not comparing the major religions to a parody. I'm making hte point that if we force science classes to teach things that have no scientific basis simply because more than 100 people believe it then where does it end?

    "It's part of our history, and you can't fully understand a subject without learning it's history."

    This is true, but this shouldn't be in a science class. I didn't learn about the scopes monkey trial in my biology class, I learned about it in ... history class. You know the class where you learn about history :)
  • bloc said on May 17, 2008....
    @pickers

    Here's a good example of what I mean. There are a lot of people in the south (i'm from the south) that believe that minorities are lesser human beings. They justify this belief with the Bible. Should this be taught in biology class since it's based on a major religion and a lot of people believe it? 
  • pickersplock said on May 17, 2008....
    Well, I hated biology class anyway!
    If I could have avoided it, I would have.
    I hated the fetal pig dissection.
     
  • pickersplock said on May 17, 2008....

    Your're confusing teaching that a subject is a fact, with teaching different opinions on a subject.

     

    Now, here is a very smart teacher;

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/divided/

     

  • lfbno7 said on May 17, 2008....
    You get such a cross section of ideas here. Some left, some right, some neither. Some really bright, some not so bright.
  • pickersplock said on May 17, 2008....
    Ooh, ooh, I hope I'm on the bright side!
  • lfbno7 said on May 17, 2008....
    hey, pickles
  • bloc said on May 17, 2008....
    "Your're confusing teaching that a subject is a fact, with teaching different opinions on a subject."

    No I'm not, I'm saying that science class should be for science, not philosophy and history. 
  • pickersplock said on May 17, 2008....
    Alright, you don't need to make fun of my editing, I was in a rush to get out the door, when I wrote the comment.  Hahaha, very funny, you got me.:(
  • truthsayer said on May 17, 2008....

    Okay guys (and gals ; ) I just came in from outdoors. I was working (and a bit of playing). I need to clean up before I get into a huge and detailed response.

    I think I have a unique way of dealing with your comments bloc and SeanR. I will answer you both as best I can, upon my return. I am willing to show that I read and listened to your points, and, if I can, I will do my best to show you where the argument...not just yours, but everyone that wants schools and information (including media) to keep the status quo.

    I know you cannot agree with some of us...although, we Christians see things differently than you. Unfortunately for you, it is not because we are uneducated. Far from it. Not all Christians have the same level of education and we are not all in the same socio-economic bracket...but of course you know that, my rabble-rousing son, my dear Sean.

    I have had more money in the last five years than you may earn in decades. My husband has some "issues" as he calls them. He has trouble holding on to money. He went through an awful lot of mine. It would boggle your mind, I am sure. ; ) But you cannot cast me, and all Christians in the same socio-economic level. Of course you know that is pretensious and, well, not very smart. :^P

    You can do better than these sweeping generalizations, can't you? bloc!!! Spaghetti Monsters haunting you again? Really, you should clean out from under your bed ; )

    Christians as a whole have been pretty comfortable...too comfortable imho, with their understanding, or rather, their interpretation of the Biblical instruction to be "set apart." So you guys think we have been silent, and out of your hair for a long time. But it's up to us to speak the truth guys...just like you feel that you are speaking the truth, as you understand, or interpret it.

    We have to live by different standards than you Sean, and bloc, for that matter. And different Christians have different levels of faith, different measures of grace. That doesn't change Sean, based upon YOUR understanding, or your interpretation...it is according to their own understanding.

    Anyway, I'll get back to this later guys.

    Pickersplock!!! Alien!!!

    I have a question for you and lfbno7 and all other "supporters of change".

    Do you feel like Sean and bloc listened and understood you? Do you feel like they listened and then disagreed? Or that they disagreed and thus, refused to listen? I have an opinion, or a take on this too...that's why I ask.

    I am asking that of SeanR and bloc too...do you feel like we who would LIKE to see ID Theory taught in public schools listened and then disagreed? Or that we disagree and refused to listen?

    Just a question from one humble truthsayer, but one who stands on the Rock, and from that, she shall not be moved. But it never hurts to listen. I ALWAYS learn something.

    Thanks folks.

    Love, love, love,

    Truthsayer

  • bloc said on May 17, 2008....
    @truth
    I guess it's easier to put on the costume of some sort of victim than to have a discussion about the points we've both raised. I have said nothing about Christians generally, their socio-economic-status, or any other sweeping generalizations. The only thing I've said that can remotely be construed as such is that young earth creationism is absolutely not science and it requires willful ignorance to believe it. There is no reasoned way to dispute the evidence that the earth, and life on it, is older than 6000 years or so. 

    You are the one that started criticizing me as a person in this thread and everyone can go back and read it to see. 

    "do you feel like we who would LIKE to see ID Theory taught in public schools listened and then disagreed? Or that we disagree and refused to listen?"

    I have to conclude the later since you've written substantial comments after I've raised my questions yet have not addressed my points. Nor has any other person that wants it taught in schools. 

    You seem to take issue with FSM, but can you give me a reason why it shouldn't be taught if young earth stuff should? 
  • lfbno7 said on May 17, 2008....
    My answer to your question is that most people just argue their case, rather than really listen to someone else's ideas. Most conversations, not only here but elsewhere, consist of people saying what they have on their mind, more like two monologues than one dialogue. If you find someone you can talk to who really listens to you and takes your ideas seriously, and you feel the same about them, it's rare.
  • SeanRenaud said on May 18, 2008....
    Generally speaking this debate, like many others isn't one about convincing you.  I'm never going to convince you, you'll claim that there are educated people who don't believe in evolution, and someone else will claim that most scientist don't believe in climate change/global warming.  (I myself doubt human beings are responsible for the phenomon, I believe there is sufficient evidence that climate changes in cycles.  And honestly I barely trust the weatherman to tell me the weather through Friday, much less through 2100.  Doesn't mean I deny the current facts as they are presented)  Point is this.  I don't need to convince you, or lfbno7.  Such a thing is impossible.
     
    The goal is quite frankly to make you look stupid.  It's the others who might/are reading this who need to see that your side can't properly enter this debate because really it shouldn't be a debate.  Creationism isn't science.  Period.  Inteligent design is poorly veiled Creationism, and honestly by MOST standards can be torn to shreds in a matter of moments. 
     
    I don't feel that either of you listened, the fact that both myself and bloc left clear questions to be addressed and neither of you even attempted  answer. 
     
    The truth is that this debate is difficult because as bloc pointed out it's like debating Jedi vs aeronautics. 
  • lfbno7 said on May 18, 2008....
    You know everything.
  • SeanRenaud said on May 18, 2008....
    No I don't.  But I know that ID and Creationism aren't science and teaching them as science sets a dangerous precedent.
     
    Since I know you're here though this question is simple.  Why shouldn't we teach the things I mentioned in history class?  Why not teach that 9/11 was George Bush trying to take over the world.  Nearly half of America (and I bet that number grows outside of the states) believes that to be true.  Why not teach the Holocaust was a Jewish Hoax? 
     
    Just aswer those two things nothing else.
  • lfbno7 said on May 18, 2008....
    I wouldn't teach something that is just false, so the Holocaust thing is out. Why teach outright lies? It's worthwhile to teach things that are true, but just not known today.

    Here's an example of that. Kids are taught that in Columbus's day people thought the world was flat, and Columbus was one of the few, or the only one, who said it was round. Now that was a lie. In Columbus's day Everyone Knew the world was round. It was old news. Sailors saw their buddies' ships go over the end of the horizon, but then they saw their buddies again a few months or years later, and learned for a fact that they did not fall off the end of the earth just because they dropped out of sight. It was a fact that everyone knew damn well, an age of exploration, and no idiot in the business thought the earth was flat. The story that people in the 15th century were of the opinion that the earth is flat was just a stupid lie made up by American author Washington Irving.

    Plato taught that the earth was a ball. Aristotle taught that the earth was a sphere of no great size, and proved it by saying that in different parts of the world, different stars can be seen, and that can happen only with a spherical earth.

    As for the George Bush WTC connection, I don't know what to say about it at all. In my experience, very few people believe it. They'd think it was kooky of me to even take it as a possibility. But there are reasons to believe that WTC 1, 2, and 7 were all brought down by explosives, and our government always lies its ass off, so I can't totally discount the possibility that we don't know the whole truth about how those buildings came down. It's hard to think that Bush himself took them down though. Damn! That's a stretch, even for him. But I wouldn't be shocked. I consider him a traitor anyway, for the way he treats America.
  • silverwhisper said on May 18, 2008....
    truth, you know i disagree with you. creationism/intelligent design has absolutely no place in a science class, b/c it isn't science: it's philosophy and/or theology. this point is utterly indisputable.

    if it's to be in schools, intelligent design has a place in philosophy, where the questions of why are answered. why isn't a question science is capable of answering and i think this obsession among the religious right with putting religion into science classes is colossally wrong-headed and frankly, quite telling.

    ed
  • SeanRenaud said on May 18, 2008....
    I'll go re-research but as I understood it relatively few people believed the world was round at the time.  Heck half the evidence you cite is either phrased wrong, or just plain wrong.  You saw your buddie's ship vanish over the horizon and then you saw them a few days later=round earth and they didn't fall off the planet?  What lunacy is that? 
     
    The fact is that human beings can only see so far, by your logic the world suddenly got bigger when they invented telescopes because their buddies who had just vanished reappeared!!!!!  Obviously line of sight=round earth.
     
    One needs only  look at the ceiling of a really big building, then move to a new location in that building and look up again to see that a flat earth would support the concept of differnt locations different stars.  Now I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt here (though you've done nothing to deserve it) and I'm assuming what you meant is that different stars at different times of the year=round earth.  Which also really isn't true per'se.  You could have different stars at different times because the stars were moving or because the planet was moving.
     
    He wasn't the only person, not by a long shot but he was in the minority.  Much like people who believe in evolution are a minority today.  Still far to many people buy into "alternative theories".
     
    Course since we can't go back in time and do a poll it's kind of a moot thing to debate.  I mean even if say all the sailors and all the priests, and all the royalty believed the world was round that's still a very small percentage.
     
    Also as for the Holocast being fake as and outright lie, if you're entire point, as it was claimed earlier, is to teach children independent thoght why not teach them this "outright lie" surely they should be able to tell the truth from the lies? 
  • truthsayer said on May 18, 2008....

    TO SEANR and BLOC:

    Wow folks. I am astounded by this discussion. I don't see it as a debate though. I am not one to debate. I am one to discuss, and whenever possible, achieve some level of understanding.

    I can see that answering several individuals in one response has not been working well for me. I am sorry for any misunderstanding that this has caused anyone.

    I have said over and over that I am using an old computer and old software, and I have to use html in every response. It was not meant as a personal affront or a personal attack...NONE of what I said was with any malice (on my part) at all.

    TO BLOC, Alone:

    I see that there are areas where we "bypass" each other...respond without actively "listening"/reading, or without real understanding. Welcome to the human race: We ALL have that tendancy...myself included.

    I was simply drawing our attention to the things we all do, that can make communication difficult BLOC. This was not, in any way meant to single you out with that question...I asked both "sides" if they would take a look inside...so that we could listen actively and with respect for the "other side". I certainly didn't intend to offend you in any way. But since it seems that I have, I can only ask for you to forgive me.

    So BLOC, will you please forgive me? And I am not "yelling" your name by using all caps...I am doing my best to call your attention to your name, so that I don't have to use the "Bold" function again in html. Since on one of my blogs, it seemed to "stick on", so that everything everyone said was in BOLD! I think SeanRenaud can attest to that fact. ; )

    So, you asked a lot of questions, that I would like to answer, if I can. Would you please separate all of the questions that you are asking me, into some simple: 1. Blah, blah, blah? 2. Blah, blah, blah? 3. Blah, blah, blah? ETC.

    I read this aloud to my son, and he said that I do not sound sarcastic or condescending, or any other rude or callous sounding rhetoric. I do not intend to sound that way, I do not feel that way. I hope this will make it simple for both of us.

    Sincerely,

    Truthsayer

  • truthsayer said on May 18, 2008....

    Now, before I say anymore, I just want to address one thing that I noticed friends. I couldn't find the reference as I scrolled back this time...but someone suggested, or accused me of playing a victim, instead of addressing something directly. That's just not my style guys.

    So, I just wanted you to know that I choose not to take offense.

    I have never, and will never do that. I am not a manipulator. I know that we are all capable of manipulating, but I certainly am not avoiding anything...I just put my real life first yesterday and last night.

    I don't think anyone accused me of such a thing before they knew that I was a woman...at least not that I recall. I just wanted to mention that folks. If me spending time with my children, and spending time with my Lord in prayer yesterday, made someone angry because I didn't get back on the computer as I had planned...well, if that bothers someone, okay. But I am not being a victim : )

    I do not take offense to the FSM personally BLOC, or SEANRENAUD...I just find it a little bit silly to use as a real point of discussion.

    Obviously if that (FLYING SPAGHETTI MONSTER), as PICKERSPLOCK said, is in your mind, on a level with the Creator of the Universe is for us...then how on earth, or how in heaven's name can there ever be respectful discussion?

    It is not the same, because you don't REALLY BELIEVE in, or know the FSM. Unless you accept the FSM as your god...well my dear, using that in a discussion or debate, as you call it...will never, ever work...for anyone. It is mocking God, unless you have accepted the FSM as your god.

    Even mocking is your personal right. Or if this is your sincere belief, or religion...then I think you should talk about your god as much as you want to. But if not, it won't help America, or our educators come into any serious understanding...so, in that light, I do see it as counter productive. We shall have to agree to disagree on it's value, or validity as a talking point friends.

    My thank you to anyone that has read and understood my words and sentiments here.

    Just One Humble Truthsayer

  • lfbno7 said on May 18, 2008....
    Sean, you are just a chronic arguer. I'm telling you the truth that nobody in Columbus's day thought the earth was flat, and I'm giving you their reasons, and you just bat it away because that is what you do, you bat things away. It's really a waste of time talking to you. The flat earth story was cooked up by novelist Washington Irving, the guy who also wrote the headless horseman story, when he was cooking up some bullshit about Columbus. He was writing a fictional story again. He was not a historian.

    And why on earth would anyone want to teach lies. There are so many other things to teach. I don't think I want to talk to you anymore, it's pointless. Why do you save all your stupidest comments for me? You seem pretty sharp elsewhere, but everything you say to me is moronic. Goodbye, sayonara, done.

    As for what is taught in science classes in school, I think there are enough scientific facts, enough chemistry experiments, enough physics lessons, and so on, that we don't need to muddy up a science class with speculation. Speculation is better suited for a class in speculation, no? In science class we can learn that water is composed of hydrogen and oxygen, and that those substances in turn are composed of protons, neutrons and electrons.
  • SeanRenaud said on May 18, 2008....
    No I batted down your reason.  Or are you debating that you can see farther with binoculars than you can see with your eyes?  It's funny you say I'm a chronic arguer simply because your wrong.
     
    Turns out this time you're about half right.  No educated person believed that the world was flat past about the third century.  (kinda like evolution. . .) but fact is the majority of the world wasn't educated then (nor are they today). 
     
    As for the evolution vs debate it's been done to death, and more than once it's been handled civilly on this site. 
  • truthsayer said on May 18, 2008....

    To SEANRENAUD:

    Yes, I think in so many ways, you and BLOC and even my late commentor, SILVERWHISPER are right. As long as you all interpret or understand Intelligent Design as a religious paradigm, then I doubt that we will get past that as a "debate" as you call it, or in a discussion, as I call it.

    You asked several questions within paragraphs too. I don't want to miss any, and I want you to feel free to remind me if I miss any. I think BLOC asked some of the same questions. I will do my best to answer the questions in your text. If you would be so kind as to extract those questions for me in the same format I asked BLOC to use: 1. Blah, blah, blah. 2. Blah, blah, blah. 3. Blah, blah, blah.

    Just in case this request of mine offends you, I will do my best to answer a few of them here. Just please be patient with me, because I am only human. Some of the questions that you (and BLOC) posed are based on a premise, or statement or assertion that is the real misunderstanding, or disagreement that we are discussing.

    LBFNO7 has a belief in God or a Higher Power, if I remember correctly...but does not believe as I believe. I don't see him getting offended. I have thoroughly enjoyed his comments and his answers. I have learned a lot from him.

    For the record, I am not offended either. Not at all. And I don't think I have said that we should teach religion in science class. That is what you said I am saying. To me, that is an absurd assertion, or premise. So, it is difficult for me to answer your questions at all SEANR.

    But, I do understand, clearly, that both you and BLOC...and now, SILVERWHISPER all believe that the whole situation can be reduced to just that.

    Your assumption, your premise, your assertion states that you do not, under any circumstances believe that there is any way that any other theories can or should be taught in public schools ever (meaning now, or in the forseeable future)...ONLY the Theory of Evolution, or Darwinism, should be allowed in the public schools, PERIOD. Isn't that what YOU, BLOC and SILVERWHISPER said? Period?

    Intelligent Design, Creationism...Young Earth or Creation Evolution is not science? Only Darwinism, or Evolutionism is science. So, that is that. With the three of you, there is no discussion at all. So, since I understand your original premise, your original assumptions upon which your entire argument/debate/discussion rests...then there is no way to argue/debate/discuss this with you. It is a "done deal" in your mind, before this blog ever started.

    So, I want you three (and anyone else that reads this blog) to know that I have to respect that. The only way we could discuss any of this in a productive way would be if there was MUTUAL respect. There is a growing body of creation scientists, creation museums, creation archeological digs. There is a growing body of scientific adherants to Intelligent Design, and frankly fellows, I haven't had a discussion with one single adherant to Intelligent Design that is a Full Gospel Bible Believing Christian. Yet I have no problem respecting them, and treating them as such. I have no problem respecting your heartfelt beliefs: SEANRENAUD, BLOC and SILVERWHISPER.

    BUT...

    I don't think that this discussion will go anywhere productive at this time, because our basic premises (sp) are so vastly different. I don't think I need to say anymore than that guys.

    BLOC, you still have a wife that I am sure is a great teacher and is in a noble profession. SEANR, your mother is a great teacher and is in a noble profession as well. SILVERWHISPER, I do not know if you have a loved one that is a teacher or not...but it sounds like you are in agreement with BLOC and SILVERWHISPER.

    BLOC, you have a beautiful baby too...and as I said earlier, I really appreciated your early comments that were sane and well presented. SEANR, you made some good points too. I still appreciate your candor...both of you. No hard feelings men.

    I know it may rankle your senses men, but I also agree with ALIENATION, PICKERSPLOCK, FEARING, SKALD, LBFNO7...who, TO ME, seem more open minded about what our education in this land is all about. I confess, I see secular humanists and this new kind of athiesm in this country as destructive. I have also heard you (bloc, SeanR, and silverwhisper) say the same about Christians and adherants to ID.

    Did I miss anything? I may have missed a few names...but I haven't missed the sentiments, I don't think. If I have, I apologize in advance.

    If I have missed some questions BLOC or SEANRENAUD, that are still valid discussions in light of our differences in the basis of our statements...then please, ask me again. If I have pretty much covered it though...then I will let it rest, respectfully ladies and gentlemen. I do not say that anyone in here is "stupid", or that they "look stupid" SEANR...Just different. I like different. I am okay with different.

    A special thanks to LFBNO7, for being the only one to answer my little questions about "listening" and doing our best to achieve understanding : ) Thanks!

    Gotta Love My Fellow Think Babies.

    Truthsayer

  • truthsayer said on May 18, 2008....

    Hey lfbno7. I have a question for you, if you're still around.

    Truth

  • truthsayer said on May 18, 2008....
    I'll be back later, if you read this. I know you said you're done. I'll check at that time and see if you've read this. Later, Truth
  • silverwhisper said on May 18, 2008....
    truth, "intelligent design" isn't science. what i and bloc have both said is that it does not belong in a science class. in other classes, it might make sense--but let's not put paint on a pig and try to pass it off as the homecoming queen, hm?

    how you can't see that creationism is theology speaks volumes of your ability or inability to see the discussion from multiple perspectives.

    science doesn't answer why. it can answer what, when, where and how--but never why. that's what philosophy & theology do, and that's what intelligent design does.

    ed
  • truthsayer said on May 18, 2008....
    I gotta go folks. I'll do my best to check back later. Feel free to keep commenting while I am gone though. I have a date with my bff. : ) Truth : )
  • truthsayer said on May 18, 2008....

    I do appreciate your "coming in" to the Cosmic Cafe...and I am not ignoring you SILVERWHISPER. I do see the difference ED.

    I see that part of what we are talking about is semantics. I may be using the wrong words for you...I am trying to be inclusive of all the different and exciting things I am reading about, hearing about and studying.

    You see, I do not learn or teach only about one theory. I am a theorist, of sorts, but without the ego. And not by degree either...I only have a Bachelor of Science.

    But so many of the greatest and most revolutionary scientists in our past, received their inspiration, insights and owe their greatest discoveries to Divine Inspiration, Insights and Innovations, that I, personally, think that it is utter foolishness to rewrite the history of science either. I don't limit my studies to theology...I like all different disciplines. But my faith is powerful in every area of my life. I do not separate it for political or any other reasons.

    I loved that show, Connections? Do you remember it? Or like the man, his name escapes me at the moment...David Suzuki! Isn't he the one that did the On The Nature Of...series? Not that he believed in God...but those kinds of things fascinate me.

    Connections. That is what it's all about. But how those connections are made...well, you and I would probably have to disagree about that too. Not why. But HOW.

    Anyway, if you're still here, or if you leave a comment for me while I am gone...I will do my best to check it out tonight ED.

    Take care and we'll talk again, I am sure.

    Truthsayer

  • silverwhisper said on May 18, 2008....
    i know the show and am myself a big fan of cross-disciplinary studies, truth.

    truth, you're conflating the meanings of things in this latest comment, well beyond their logical breaking point IMHO. we understand one another, and i don't really think there's much left to be said.

    but good to see you again, truth. :>

    ed
  • bloc said on May 18, 2008....
    @truth
    no worries about the earlier stuff. I've certainly said a lot of things that people have taken offense to when I really didn't mean it that way. It's hard communicating it text sometimes. I'll make a post with my questions and link it here.
  • bloc said on May 18, 2008....
    my post is here
  • pickersplock said on May 18, 2008....

    I've thought about this a lot Truth, and I would like to express, if I may, that I am not talking curriculum here, I'm talking about being responsible as an educator and recognizing the diversity within any classroom.

    I'm talking about a real class in the real world, be it science or history.

    Using bloc's example of the holocaust.

     

    You are going about your business, teaching your class, and the topic for the day is, World War II.  Yes, I'm assuming this is history class.

    You are talking about Nazi atrocities , when Junior raises his hand and says,

    "But teacher, my Dad says the holocaust never happened!"

    After you manage to stop the blood from spurting out of your eyeballs, you realize that you can either tell Junior that he's an idiot and to sit down and shut up, or you can use this as an opportunity to educate him and the class about how these theories got started and together research all of the archives on concentration camps, perhaps have a holocaust survivor come to the class and speak.

    Now apply this scenario to creationism.  You're teaching a science class, and the topic is the big bang theory.  Little Susie raises her hand and says, My Dad the **** minister says..................."

    What do you do?  Are your hands tied?

    Do you say, I'm sorry dear this is science class, we can't discuss that topic, it has no scientific basis.....................or do you use this as an opportunity to educate the class on diversity of opinion.  This is the real world we're talking about, so in addition you may have to worry about Susie getting the crap kicked out of her when she goes home and tells her Dad what she learned, because her father is a closed minded bigot.

    I would hope that you would say that some people believe this, and some people believe that, and there is evidence of this that and the other thing, but most scientists believe X.

     

    I don't know if anyone gets what I'm talking about.  I started my Master's degree in education, and one of my favorite classes was Philosophy of Education.

    I got an A!

    Yes, I know I only teach dance and theater arts right now, but I'd like to think I'm prepared for any questions.  And believe me, I've had some doozys!

  • bloc said on May 18, 2008....
    @pickers
    that's an interesting situation that is hard to navigate for a teacher. I think you would run the risk of pissing off the parent if you try to "educate" the questioner. 
  • SeanRenaud said on May 18, 2008....
    Not that I disagree or doubt the existance of the Holocaust but a Holocaust survivor doesn't prove there were gas chambers it proves there were concentration camps.   And if they survived there is a 99.99~ % chance they weren't sent to the chambers.
  • pickersplock said on May 19, 2008....

    But that is your job Bloc, so you must do it in as diplomatically as possible.

    Whether you want to acknowledge it or not, roughly 70% of Americans have a religious background.  Therefore, these questions will be asked.

    As an educator, you need to be prepared with some kind of intelligent answer.

    You can't just say, "I'm not discussing this crap!  Sorry, but your entire family is delusional."

     

    SR, I don't know where to begin.  My Uncle fought in World War II.

    He met and married my Aunt in Germany, her little brother was taken away and gassed by the Nazis.

    SARCASM ALERT

    I'm sure if she were still alive, she would be thrilled that you would make such insensitive remarks, as would Otto Frank.

    Perhaps, if I organized a tour of concentration camps, and had my students view the gas chambers and the ovens at Auschwitz, Bergen Belsen, and Treblinka, you would be satisfied?

    Then we could do an archaeological dig at the sites of mass burials, and exhume the bodies for autopsy to determine the cause of death, would that make you happy?

  • SeanRenaud said on May 19, 2008....

    No because I believe that the Holocaust happened.   The point remains that there are people who don't believe it and they have organized a lot of research that if you don't know exactly  what's wrong with the statement you won't be able to debate it with them.  I mean even as an adult there are convincing arguments to be made against it.  Such as the supposed mention of gas tanks in some of gas chambers, and the supposed inclusion of them in the chambers (which were supposedly destroyed and rebuilt for historical purposes.)

     

  • pickersplock said on May 19, 2008....

    Did you just say that there are convincing arguments that the holocaust was a hoax? 

    Would you care to share these with the class?

  • bloc said on May 19, 2008....
    @pickers
    "roughly 70% of Americans have a religious background"

    True, but this doesn't mean they dismiss evolution and believe in a talking snake. 

    I agree it's a teachers job to discuss this, I'm just pointing out that it's an area that they have to tread lightly. 
  • truthsayer said on May 21, 2008....

    Well my friends...this was a pleasant surprise to read through today. I must say that it was my first pleasant surprise today as well...so, for that, I thank you.

    Pickers, I couldn't agree with you more.

    Bloc, I will check out your blog and questions. I am a little under the weather today though. I will mark it for later, if I am not feeling any better. But, as you know, I keep my word...and I will get to it sir.

    SeanRenaud, I hope you understood what pickersplock was getting at. This has been something I have been doing my best to address with each of you too, when it comes to what examples we use for our discussions. The examples we choose for comparisons are, as ed would say, "telling".

    I want to thank all of you for a great discussion. I hope this one was enlightening for all who participated. It is a very important topic, and one in which I, like others, have a keen interest in.

    Thank you one and all,

    Truthsayer

  • SeanRenaud said on May 21, 2008....
    1. I use the analogy because I think it's really the most appropriate.  It is something that has absolutely overwhelming evidence to support it, yet some deny it.  The only difference is that there are a lot more people who don't believe evolution than the holocaust.
     
    That's for you pickers. not that in no way do I doubt the Holocaust, what I am saying is that given a fair shake down in a classroom I'm not sure you would have everybody convinced, or even a sound majority.  There are people who believe this and they have rediculous reasons behind it, like eyes are too compicated to be random (even though evolution isn't random) and they have their facts on why jews would make a more useful as slave labor than just as slaughter.
     
     
  • bloc said on May 21, 2008....
    @truthsayer
    I hope you feel better :)
  • pickersplock said on May 21, 2008....

    I can't believe you're hanging out in sites like that SR.

    Try hanging out in here instead, maybe you'll learn something worthwhile!

    http://www.nizkor.org/ 

  • bloc said on May 21, 2008....
    I think it's telling that both you (truth) and pickers avoid answering the question that sean raises. Both of you have claimed that certain religious beliefs should be taught simply because a lot of people believe them. If we follow this principle then it must also hold true for the holocaust deniers and the 9/11 conspiracy theorists. Hell, there is far more "evidence" for the 9/11 conspiracies than there are for young earth creationism.
  • pickersplock said on May 21, 2008....

    Didn't we just agree that if questions are asked, they must be discussed?

    However idiotic.

    You two seem to think, that students just sit there and absorb.

    Here is a question, and I'm not making this up, that was asked in my biology class.

    "If paint closes off your pores, why don't we just use spray paint instead of deodorant?"

    So even if a student believes 9/11 was a conspiracy, you must be prepared to answer intelligently.

    What happens when someone asks, "What happened, to cause the big bang at the beginning of time?"  There are a few theories, but no evidence.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1270726.stm

    You guys are still talking about curriculum and I'm talking about education!

    If someone in my class asked about a 9/11 conspiracy. I would have them go in search of evidence for and against, and then we would have a lively debate on the subject.

    That is how you learn.

    I did answer the question, and I never said that "religious beliefs" should be taught.

     

    SR, you keep saying you don't believe holocaust deniers, yet you're hanging around on Neo nazi websites. 

  • SeanRenaud said on May 21, 2008....
    I also dont' believe in God but I read the Bible and frequently go to religious sites.  I strongly believe that we should study views that are opposed to our own, if for no other reason than to know what the weak points are in it.
     
    The ciriculum is what this is about?  Did you read the blog, it asks to teach Evolution, Creationism and Inteligent Design.  It doesn't mention what we should do with if a student brings something up which is an entirely different situation.  It's so wildly different that it doesn't belong in the conversation.
     
    I don't even know why you brought up the Big Bang as it holds zero relevance to the situation.  Which makes me forces me to ask how on topic does something need to be?  If we are talking about the way polar bears are specially designed for their enviroment and a student asks you about the Big Bang do you entertain the notion?
     
    I'd love to be one of your students though, the class would never proceed anywhere cus I'd keep you busy debating for nine months of school which is something bloc pointed out.  We don't have infinite time. 
     
    Also that's twice in two posts that you've went after my charachter because I was able to google up a site?  Way to jump to conclusions, you ask me what claims there are, I search around and find some for you and you start implying that I must  be a sympathizer.  To that I say a very gloves off Fuck you very much.  Shit atleast ALIEN'll call me a pansie to my face.
  • pickersplock said on May 21, 2008....
    Uh, were we not discussing the origins of the universe, when Truth brought up Creationist theory?  I'm pretty sure the big bang theory is quite relevant.