Reply With Quote
So snakes like you can slither in and teach the 0% version?
Then why is it still theory, and not fact?
I'm saying at least make sure students know a theory isn't always 100% correct.
So snakes like you can slither in and teach the 0% version?
Didn't mean to interfere, just enquired about your mood. Carry on.
I lost your meaning. Elaborate please since a theist wouldn't be a nihilist.
"is it still theory"
In your and other creationists' mouth, "evolution is only a theory" that's pejorative, a slander, because you don't understand science.
Very little in science is facts, just theories with Ks or Ms of data that confirm the theory, and predictions made from the theory that came true.
Scientifically speaking, no. A theory has to leave no doubt and has to have at least one testable component. That's what differentiates a theory (or scientific hypothesis) and a hypothesis. There's nothing in science that disallows you to have multiple theories for the same phenomena. What science doesn't allow is to have a non-testable hypothesis.
Well, I don't know such teacher. However, I can see how a science teacher would teach established science, including contemporary theories. Frankly, any science teacher that I've known teaches the scientific method, including differentiation between theory and scientific law.
You make nihilist arguments about 100% certainty in an attempt to bring a scientific theory down to the level of your creationist pure conjecture.
Unsurprisingly, this creationist dumbstruck needs an explanation of what a "theory" means in scientific terms.
Gravity is a theory.
Not surprising someone who never went to college doesn't know such basic stuff tbh.
And gravity is a of a lot more controversial than natural selection.
Well, growing up with religious friends, I remember some turmoil about science and faith collided. In early science classes, the scientific method isn't taught. That comes later. The schools should be careful about anything that pushes hard against one's faith.
Maybe I'm being too harsh on our lovable dumb . A lot of people have a problem understanding that in scientific terms, a "theory" is about as good as it gets. They probably think a theory means something like hypothesis. There is no "proof" in any scientific field(other than math, and even that's not really a proper scientific field per say).
It's tiring seeing people who know absolutely nothing about science fail to understand what a theory means.
Why the should schools censor science just to placate those who believe in magic?
Evolution the event is a scientifically proven fact. Evolution encompasses many aspects. One is the evolutionary event, another is DNA mutation, etc. Some parts have been proven factually, some parts are still in the process of being tested and proven.
Students know. Part of learning the scientific method is knowing the difference between theory and law. What science won't do is teach that non-testable hypothesis are science.
They do. Teachers don't need to teach religion in order to get across what "theory" means.
You guys would have no problem with evolution if you didn't see it as contradictory to Christianity. No one ever complains about the hundreds of other scientific theories taught in public schools, but for some reason you can't mess with Adam and Eve.
The fact of gravity as we experience it isn't theory. Just how it words.
my mood is fine.
I thought snc talking about calling his mom and asking about his intelligence level was pretty funny. I was just poking a bit more to see if he would say something even funnier.
The fact of evolution as we experience it isn't a theory. Just how it words.
Crofl creationist dumb .
I don't think they should be careful at all. I think in the proper context, diversity is a great thing. Let the kids decide for themselves what they should believe.
As a liberal, I hope science teachers give F minuses to any kid brazen enough to identify himself as a christian within the walls of a public school. That violates my rights to be free from religion.
LOL...
Saw this in SourCandy's sig, while reading other threads:
Most people can't name 5 scientific theories. I'm not sure I could.
Good luck.my mood is fine.
I thought snc talking about calling his mom and asking about his intelligence level was pretty funny. I was just poking a bit more to see if he would say something even funnier.
You are wise.
My wiccan friends do
Except that's exactly how the Bible was created anyway. You have multiple authors all writing parts of the Bible in their own interpretation (even with the same divine inspiration, individual accounts would vary). Even if you view the whole as a literary prose, parts of the Bible can be thought of as accurate depictions.
It's like a movie "inspired by true events." Some things are very close to accurate, while others are very far apart and done to make the story work. You don't have to believe the entirety is literal to believe parts of it are.
There's also the fact that the Bible most people read has gone through 2 major revisions, and parts have gone through up to 6 or 7 translations. Hard to keep the accuracy through all that.
Personally, I view the entire Bible as a series of parables, and therefore none of it is literal, but I also don't consider myself Christian, so my opinion doesn't realy matter.
I think this is the key to the problem. I do not believe the entire Bible in any current English form. None stray too far away from the King James version, which in my view, was clearly written to control the people.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
