Bush re-ignites evolution debate

As an outsider is not easy (nor even right) to have opinion on the educational systems of other countries. However I wasn't taught the principle elements of evolutionary theory during my last year of school (17-18); principally because it isn't an easy subject to get a firm understanding of I believe. It was also a new science back in 1970 because the thereoretical scaffold that gives Darwinism any hope of holding up wasn't fully understood until 1953 (DNA). There were also objections of geography that hindered Darwin ... these were undermined when the surveys of the ocean floors in the late 1950s revealed compelling evidence of plate tectonics. In other words I do not think that it is important for it to be taught in schools other than as a mention of the facts of the existence of a theory that conflicts with the established biblical view. I am a committed evolutionist but even so I am the first to admit that the evidence to tie human ancestry with pongo and cousins isn't especially firm. (By faith I am an agnostic and it is rare for me to find -- a small c -- christian who actually understands what an agnostic is ... mostly they just fork the sign of the evil eye at me and scuttle away muttering prayers and invocations of protection ... so much for brotherly love )

 

Actually, there's a ton of evidence to support Darwinism. We're not directly descended from apes, we're a branch of the ape family, much like no matter how many times you breed chimpanzees you'll never get a gorilla. However, all life on earth is descended from the same first amoeba, so in that way we are all part of the same family.

Darwinism is all around us, in human as well as animal and plant evolution.

As for "intelligent design" oh my goddess. Why doesn't he just sign our children up for cartoon physics while he's at it? Where'd he pull that theory out of? I think our government is testing to see just how much BS we'll accept before we all run screaming for the hills.

I'm not saying that there is no god/goddess. I'm just firmly convinced that evolution IS the intelligent design.

Why some Christians can't accept that is beyond me.

 

Whoops. Just noticed an error in my post. I wasn't taught evolution until my last year.

Agree with you sbw. The intelligence in the design are the laws of physics which governs everything. I am content to leave that part for God to own. I am also so pleased with quantum uncertainty and chaos theory without which everything would just be predetermined. Every event, every thought even, would just be an inevitable consequence of the motion of particles. But predestination isn't real ... because a single photon can make an interference pattern with itself and that ought to be impossible but isn't and meanwhile quantum indeterminacy allows for instantaneous transfer of information (or even matter) over any distance ... though proving it is problematic 'twould be a neat trick though

 

OK. Had to read your post several times but I think I got the gist of it and it is exciting. I haven't studied quantum physics at all but it sounds like something I should look into ...

So, what you're saying is biology doesn't determine everything?

 

Good for Bush.
I think it's a good idea to teach evolution and intelligent design alongside eachother. It should give kids an unbiased look at things and will allow them to make up their minds on which one seems more logical to them instead of thinking I was taught it - so it must be correct (which I've heard people say.)

 

I envy everyone from other countries that can just shake their head at this. My region also offers biblical history and geography courses that can be taken in lieu of world history. I think I'm quite tolerant. I have no problem with these course being offered as an elective. I'm horrified they are offered as legitimate substitutes for major subjects. My son's schedule came one year with biblical history assigned because world history was full. The staff was apparently stunned when I marched in and demonstrated "righteous indignation". No matter how they think they write the textbooks or how careful they think the instructor is...these subjects will always be taught from a fundamentalist Christian perspective. If a parent wants their child to be taught subjects from this perspective they need to homeschool or find a private Christian academy. I've read through several of the textbooks that teach "intelligent design". It is religious dogma presented in textbook form.

 

The beauty of intelligent design lays in the undeniable fact that, if properly applied, it is permissible to ascribe to a creator that which cannot be explained anyhow, way or why. You need an example? Explain pi or describe (rationally) the square root of minus 1. If you can do either of those things you will have little trouble explaining how a "big bang" might occur.

 

I attended church as a child, was taught all about Adam and Eve and all the religious stuff along with it, it gave me the opportunity, at a young age to formulate the opinion that I don't believe any of it. I am a firm agnostic, I will believe it when I see it with my own eyes.

Whether Bush's idea of introducing 'intelligent design' is a good one or not, no I don't think so. If a parent wants their child to be taught those things, they will take that child to church. What about those of different religions? I'm sure the parents of those children would be horrified to know that they are going to be taught something that is radically different from their own beliefs.

Christianity seems to be a dying religion, with so many people chosing to take up other beliefs, or formulate their own, this may just be an attempt by Bush to revieve it, I don't think it's going to work....

 

I agree that these ideas belong in church, OR we need to teach ALL religions in school, which is impossible because there are so many shades of religion it would get to be a huge mess.

I am not a Christian. The idea that my child would have Christian ideology taught to her at a public school upsets me. I am not anti-Christian. I just don't think it's the only answer. It's certainly not mine.

Let's keep it separate, please. Schools should stick to teaching things rooted in fact, not belief. There is evidence for Darwinism. Intelligent Design on the other hand, is the belief that some things are too amazing for us to worry our pretty little heads about. I don't think that kind of thinking belongs in our schools.

The last time we mixed church and state in the U.S. people got burned at the stake. The Taliban was a church-run state. I don't think I'm overreacting when I say we're headed down a very dangerous slippery slope.

 

For some reason our government has become very Fundamentalist-Chirstian, and many people believe that it is a good thing. Conservative Christians voted in droves for George W. because of the ideals that he believes in. I think he is crooked and a liar and I don't care how much Bible-Thumping he does. He lied to me and the rest of the country about Iraq and the WMD, he's got no exit strategy for getting our troops out of Iraq, his policies have caused MORE terrorism and anti-American sentiment, not less, and he cuts public programs and domestic aid policies (such as welfare and education programs) so that he can pump more money into the military. He cuts taxes for the rich and raises them for the poor. He has stopped stem-cell research from advancing because he feels that it's a form of abortion.

I refuse to believe that he has done anything good for this country as a whole with the exception of stregthening homeland security. I beleive that he distracts the public by saying and doing these fundamentalist crap so that his supporters, the other conservative right-wing Christians, will say, "That A Boy, Dubbya." He doesn't actually think of the good of the people as a whole, just those he caters to. To me, that is not a good president!

Now, if we are going to teach this in the school, Mr. "Yale-Educated, thinks things through sooo well" President Bush, how do we present it? Do we teach it as "There is another theory besides Darwinsim, and here it is?" Do we excuse those children who are not Christian. Since I am a Christian, I am not knowledgable about other religions, so I'm speaking from ignorance and I'm sorry. Do Hindus believe that God created the Heavens and the Earth? Do Buddists? Do Muslims? And do we teach these children from the book of Genesis, or are biblical scholars going to re-write the science books our children learn from?

You know, as I said, I am a Christian. But I don't believe that the Bible is 100% perfectly accurate. Many scholars, archeologists, historian, have gone to show that many of the bible stories in the old testement were fables, legends, or stories meant to teach a moral instead of to be taught as a true event. I don't think that you have to believe that God created the universe in 6 days and that Adam named the animals and that Noah survived a great flood by building an ark, etc. to be a Christian. I think you have to believe in the teachings of Jesus Christ, to love and help your fellow man no matter who he is, to be honest and live your best life, and to have some faith. I know that's not very popular belief system today, but that's the one that I have. And to me, just because I pray to God, doesn't mean that the person who prays to the Goddess or the one who prays to Allah is going to Hell. I'm not sure I really believe in Hell, I believe more in reincarnation, actually. Yep, guess I'm screwed up religiously. LOL

If my child is offered a course on World History or Philosophy and this "Intelligent Design" is presented in that context, then I do not have a problem with it. I wish that I had had the opportunity to learn more about world religions and such when I was in school. But to have them taught it in a science class as an educated theory with no real evidence except for the book of Genesis to back it up, well, I'd have to disagree. And since I live in the middle of the Bible Belt, I'll probably have to deal with it sooner or later. :(

 

I believe that Jesus Christ had some very good things to say and that if people actually lived by what he taught we'd all get along a lot better. Just as if Muslims actually lived by what Mohammed taught, and so on, we'd all get along a lot better.

The problem with religions in general is the same as the problem with communism. In principle, and if practiced as they were meant to be practiced, they're a very good idea. Why shouldn't we love our neighbors and share equally amongst ourselves? If we did there would be no hatred or suffering in the world.

Unfortunately, people aren't wired that way. Animal Farm is one of the most important books ever written, IMHO, and it clearly shows how greedy people (or pigs) will always rise to the top and corrupt what was once full of good intentions (hence the saying about the road to hell ...)

People like you and me, Kristal, may live the peaceful life Jesus envisioned (even someone like me who is not religious) but there will always be people like George Bush and Osama Bin Laden and so on who use religion as an excuse to exert their power over others. The worst part is I don't think they believe a word of the religious nonsense they spout. They use it as a tool to get others to do what they want, which is power, revenge, and money. That's all it comes down to. Greed.

As for "intelligent design" being taught as part of a world religions class, you're right on the money, Kristal. But letting it into science rooms is another matter. What's next, Calculus? Believe me, as someone who is math challenged I might have said at one point, hey, I'll take the intelligent design view of Calc: it's just too mystical for me to figure out. What kid wouldn't?

 

I have always had an absolute faith in God. I dont understand how one can believe everyone has a soul and yet there is no higher power. What purpose would ones soul serve if there is nothing more? Ive come to think of all religions as pathways to the same place. We as humans just get lost in the details. Its part of each persons life journey to seek, question, and explore this for their selves. Some will never look, others will never find the answers they seek, many will follow blindly and never question. (We will put George in this categoryand not just in spiritual matters. )

Mirelly said

Now Im sure this was tongue in cheek but I shudder at the thought of the unexplainable being taught as simply the hand of God. I believe that everything has an explanation and we havent evolved enough to understand the pattern. I can reconcile creationism and evolution. My God isnt sloppy. Im sure everything can be explained. To teach creationism as a theory is lazy. It strips us of our need to explore and the joy of discovery.

This can be our sign when we march on our local school boards or Washington!


I think many people are cramming this particular religious dogma down everyones throats because the world is scary. Schools have metal detectors, gang violence has hit the suburbs, you pay huge taxes but nothing works well, medical care is unaffordable, benefits promised over a lifetime have disappeared. The little things that provide touchstones for most adults are now illegal or no longer politically correct. Prayer before the football game, Christmas nativity scenes placed in the town square, buying valentine cards to hand out at school, etcthese things marked the seasons of ones life. People are attempting to keep some morals, some rules, some boundaries to make the world feel familiar and safe. Fundamentalist Christianity is black and white, right or wrong, hell or heaven. I think many erroneously believe that following this path rigidly will put the world back the way it used to be.

 

"Paving his way into Heaven with Gold" I think that is an apt description of what Bush is trying to do here....

You want to know something that is frightening to me at this moment? The fact that my Prime Minister (John Howard) is so far up Bushs' you know what, that I'm just waiting for him to suggest the idea here. He took on the whole senate yesterday and demanded that some policy had to go through, regardless if he had their support or not. It's not healthy for one individual to have so much power of the lives of so many others.

 

Exactly. Bush just went behind Congress's back and nominated this scary right-wing guy for the Supreme Court. He has no regard for due process or even for the laws he has sworn to uphold. He tells bold-faced lies with a smile and people believe him.

I think he's a very dangerous man. I used to think he was an idiot, but not anymore. He's much smarter than people think, just not book smart.

 

Bush is simply a "good old boy". The government is directed by Rumsfeld and Cheney. I can't wait to see Shrub's presidential library and the presidential papers. I suppose they might add a closet on to daddy's library because it certainly won't need to be larger than an outhouse. I picture it with stencils of catchphrases on the wall..."No Child Left Behind"...."War On Terror", etc. A few pictures of Barney might have a special spot. There will be a single pedestal in the center of the room. It will contain a stringed puppet that has his likeness. It will be holding a rubber stamp that says "geterdun".

 

(snort, giggle, snort, giggle giggle) I think you hit the nail on the head.

Adding to the Anti-Bush sentiment, does everyone here know that George Sr., aka "Big Daddy" was the head of the CIA during the JFK Assasination? If you're a Conspiracy buff, that's a good one to chew on. Did anyone see the shows that came out on channels like "The Discovery Channel" and "A&E" a couple of years ago for the anniversary of the assasination? There were about 3 or four diffrent shows with diffrent forensic scientist disproving all the conspiracy theories and proving that Oswald was the shooter and acted alone. Strange when it's these same channels that have historically reported on the different conspiracies and put together such shows as "The Men Who Killed Kennedy." Now why, oh why, would these channels suddenly produce anti-conspiracy documentaries? Hummmmm.

 

I have given up on mainstream media. For the most part they are toadies to the government, something that is made painfully obvious by examples like Kristal states.

I can actually see why conservatives used to complain about the "liberal" media a while ago. Journalistic integrity takes a backseat to survival. Hard to blame them, of course, but it makes me respect publications that stick to their guns.

 

The fun thing about conspiracy theories is that -- like urban myths -- sooner or later they gain a credence that makes separation of fact from fantasy more and more difficult. Eventually the whole mess can be strained through any size of mesh and you end up with a shelf, full of products that range from a consomme suitable for invalids at one end to a coarse chorizo sausage, more appropriate to the pioneering gourmand, at the other. This is then labelled history and everyone can find a version that best suits their prejudices ... ooops sorry, I mean "palates"

 

I think you hit it on the nose Mirelly. History is written by the victors ... I think an unvarnished history of the world would be a fascinating read if one could get hold of one, but it would most likely be upsetting as well.

Since truth is subjective this document is of course an impossibility. Your truth is my chorizo sausage, or something like that.

Still, it gives me a great idea for a novel.