should they teach about creation in school

[Gambol]

For the record, I would like to say that gravity is still considered a scientific theory.

You might want to re-evaluate your definition of "scientific theory".




Here's a hint:
A scientific theory is still under tests, yes. HOWEVER, it has proven itself over and over in tests to be true. Modifications to said theory can be made if some anomaly occurs.

Granted, some theories have way more proof than others.
But, let's face it. For something to be called a scientific theory, it has to be observable, testable, repeatable, and so on.

Just saying.  

[divineseraph]

zz1000zz

Master Protoman_exe

I'm sorry, but theories should not go about schools as though they are facts. It's not ethically right.

Seeing as everything in science can never amount to anything more than a theory, that would mean we could never teach anything. Somehow that seems bad.

...no... your stupidity really is amusing.


science never says that anything is definite because it is impossible to know. it IS possible to be pretty damned close to being sure. science takes into account all possible changes. true science alters only one variable at a time to ensure that the results are from the thing they changed. Even then, science always admits that there is potential for human error, or unkown circumstances. hence everything being a theory, not fact. it's not saying "we have no clue but here's a guess," it's saying "this is what we have from repeated tests, and unless there is a factor we don't know about, this is why."  

[zz1000zz]

divineseraph

zz1000zz

Master Protoman_exe

I'm sorry, but theories should not go about schools as though they are facts. It's not ethically right.

Seeing as everything in science can never amount to anything more than a theory, that would mean we could never teach anything. Somehow that seems bad.

...no... your stupidity really is amusing.

Wait for it...

Quote:

science never says that anything is definite because it is impossible to know. it IS possible to be pretty damned close to being sure. science takes into account all possible changes. true science alters only one variable at a time to ensure that the results are from the thing they changed. Even then, science always admits that there is potential for human error, or unkown circumstances. hence everything being a theory, not fact. it's not saying "we have no clue but here's a guess," it's saying "this is what we have from repeated tests, and unless there is a factor we don't know about, this is why."

Wow! You agreed with me. And you said i was stupid in the process! Wow! What does that make you?  

[The Noble Protoman.exe]

zz1000zz

divineseraph

zz1000zz

Master Protoman_exe

I'm sorry, but theories should not go about schools as though they are facts. It's not ethically right.

Seeing as everything in science can never amount to anything more than a theory, that would mean we could never teach anything. Somehow that seems bad.

...no... your stupidity really is amusing.

Wait for it...

Quote:

science never says that anything is definite because it is impossible to know. it IS possible to be pretty damned close to being sure. science takes into account all possible changes. true science alters only one variable at a time to ensure that the results are from the thing they changed. Even then, science always admits that there is potential for human error, or unkown circumstances. hence everything being a theory, not fact. it's not saying "we have no clue but here's a guess," it's saying "this is what we have from repeated tests, and unless there is a factor we don't know about, this is why."

Wow! You agreed with me. And you said i was stupid in the process! Wow! What does that make you?

You need to stop critisizing. That goes for him, too.  

[zz1000zz]

Master Protoman_exe

zz1000zz

divineseraph

zz1000zz

Master Protoman_exe

I'm sorry, but theories should not go about schools as though they are facts. It's not ethically right.

Seeing as everything in science can never amount to anything more than a theory, that would mean we could never teach anything. Somehow that seems bad.

...no... your stupidity really is amusing.

Wait for it...

Quote:

science never says that anything is definite because it is impossible to know. it IS possible to be pretty damned close to being sure. science takes into account all possible changes. true science alters only one variable at a time to ensure that the results are from the thing they changed. Even then, science always admits that there is potential for human error, or unkown circumstances. hence everything being a theory, not fact. it's not saying "we have no clue but here's a guess," it's saying "this is what we have from repeated tests, and unless there is a factor we don't know about, this is why."

Wow! You agreed with me. And you said i was stupid in the process! Wow! What does that make you?

You need to stop critisizing. That goes for him, too.

Meh. So long as people are allowed to call me names, i assume i can do the same in response. I will gladly stop, so long as others do so as well. Either way, i am not really sure i criticized anybody with that post. I mean, the sarcasm was a little rude, but it was not a direct insult. And it was rather fitting.

As for my response(s) to you, nothing i have said has been out of line. I simply disagreed with you, then showed how you were wrong. The nature of a debate.  

[Tarrou]

The criticism I don't mind, so long as it's constructive. The name calling needs to stop, though.  

[zz1000zz]

Tangled Up In Blue

The criticism I don't mind, so long as it's constructive. The name calling needs to stop, though.

I do not remember calling anyone any names, but i will try to make sure i do not do so in the future.  

[Tarrou]

zz1000zz

I do not remember calling anyone any names, but i will try to make sure i do not do so in the future.

Wasn't directed at you specifically. Just trying to keep the general tone of the thread civil.  

[Damaris Vincent]

much of what I've read on your backing of scientific theory I will agree with, in that it is, as you said... "science never says that anything is definite because it is impossible to know. it IS possible to be pretty damned close to being sure. science takes into account all possible changes. true science alters only one variable at a time to ensure that the results are from the thing they changed." and "A scientific theory is still under tests, yes. HOWEVER, it has proven itself over and over in tests to be true. Modifications to said theory can be made if some anomaly occurs." and "For something to be called a scientific theory, it has to be observable, testable, repeatable, and so on."

Now here's where my disagreement of your position comes in. By your own words, you say it has to be observable, and yet, no one alive today can actually say that they observed the beginning of the world. You say testable, how can it be truly tested? Repeatable, I'd like to see anyone repeat evolution, even in it's first stages. By these tests, I see this theory as a very weak one. Now you can say the same of the intellegent design theory as well if you'd like to, but I myself wouldn't want to test God like that.

And if you're wondering what my full stand is (though it doesn't mean I'm going to be pig-headed and snobish to those who have differing views) I believe that the Bible is the true and infalliable Word of God, and if you don't believe the first chapter, then the rest really won't hold much meaning for you. If one part can be wrong, it gives you leave to pick apart the rest and choose (like a buffet line) what you'd like to believe as true. If I stepped on anyones toes, while, I said that this was my belief, and you have your own God given right to take your own stance. I guess we'll all see when we get up there.  

[Damaris Vincent]

And now I will leave further discussion for the proper thread.  

[Gambol]

By the way:

*totally playing Devil's Advocate*

if the Judeo/Christian creation story should be taught as a valid theory, then shouldn't other creation myths be taught as valid theories?  

[The Noble Protoman.exe]

Most of them are pretty much same in origin.  

[Gambol]

Master Protoman_exe

Most of them are pretty much same in origin.

You could probably see why a secular school system would view it as redundant.


Really, I don't agree with it, but I can see their reasoning. You know?  

[The Noble Protoman.exe]

Gambol

Master Protoman_exe

Most of them are pretty much same in origin.

You could probably see why a secular school system would view it as redundant.


Really, I don't agree with it, but I can see their reasoning. You know?

*shrug* I say there should be alternative options for such things. Like not teach it at all, or have separate classes... or my personal favorite... spend and entire year teaching every single view!  

[ryoushinn]

Today, people think that "If they can "prove" it, then it's right." But guess what? Humans make mistakes. And humans make science. And since we make mistakes, our science may be totally wrong though we "think" we've proven it.

They teach about it in school, i remember it, pass the tests, and don't believe it. I believe we are here because God wanted children, and we arn't here from being made from some particles.

Well, today people say "We all have our own beliefs." Everytime someone says that, they're pushing away from the fact and doubting God. And if they are going to say that, they shouldn't be making us learn about creation, which, is their belief.