WITHTEETH

Jedi Master Dakari there are more then one way to date. I disagree with you and think that carbon dating is generally accurate. This argument has been done a thousand times already with Carbon dating, and everytime you guys lose this battle. Your view on carbon dating is through creationists version of science where they can bend the facts of science. Just like how they did in the 2nd law of thermodynamcs, a mutation with added information and IR. Science is based on empirical evidence Your religion is based on Faith They belong in seperate realms, or at least in seperate schools.

love your sig

And should evolution be presented in your sunday church as a valid possibility? Faith is NOT a way to think, thus it has no place in schools. faith [fayth] (plural faiths) noun 1. belief or trust: belief in, devotion to, or trust in somebody or something, especially without logical proof 2. religion religion or religious group: a system of religious belief, or the group of people who adhere to it Microsoft

Wow Jedi Master Dakari, Your a character. Anyways...

Schools aren't just for teaching this days? hmm, this is new. Now they have to forcefully mention Intelligent design so that kids won't go home confused, and ask their parents "Mom look, i learned an empirical explination for the origin of mankind, what empirical truth does christianity have?"

I think you're missing my point completely. What about those who staunchly believe in creationism, aka intelligent design, who would be forced to hear that their beliefs are wrong. Key word: offending. I think it's fine to teach intelligent design in schools ONLY if it's presented as a theory and not delved into. In other words, present the theory of ID in the classroom as an alternate theory and leave it at that, then go into evolution. And you don't need to "present all sides" as long as you keep the intelligent design theory generic. In other words, make it applicable to any religion/belief. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Its not compatible to all religions. What about hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, Humanism, scientiology. This is christianity imposing its will on a practice. Whats next, algebra? ID is not a theory either. When in science, Scientific Theories are the closest things to facts as possible. We just don't call them facts because, humbly thats the best we have so far( that is my view anyway). Christians that are for ID taught in science rooms are imposing there will on science when they have no ground. besides "The world is just to complex, so lets stop thinking" That is called a dark age.

simple logic Science needs to be science. Intelligent design is not science. Thus intelligent design should not be taught in science.

Both sides? No then we would have to teach ALL sides. Flying Speghetti Monster, Pink Unicorns Vishnu, Shakti, That which can only be described as "that", Isis, Madza, Mithra, Isis, Christ, Zeus and on and on and on. I agree with Darkside, Save it for a comparitive religion, christinity, or philosophy class. We did discuss is in my philiosophy classes.

I think Lonewolf is right.

I'm not religious. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Im not Spiderman.

Anything under the Mason Dixie line is super Christy

This is disapointing. It was suppose to come out in the 15th of November, this month. 5 days from now. They really procrastinated on giving us this bit of info. Ohwell, its worth waiting for.

The public are slaves to idols.

Yes i agree. Kansas students and scientists are already getting discrimination from other sates when they apply.

Great points Commissar. I still want to stress though that science(statistics) do not suggest one how to live like christianity. Christianity, as well as the intentions are, some of their values and morals confict with this day and age. The book is aging, and with that age, what is acceptable changes. Change is good(i think). Some of christianity does not allow these natural changes in an orthodox/strict conservative point of view. Another weakness that the bible has from time to time is that it can be so vague, so incoherent, that people can make out whatever they wish from the text.

How would Christians like it if their religion had to be based on positive empirical truths? Scientists don't want their statistics based on logical claims that can't ever be proved. How about neither impose their will on the other, and we all stay happy

Science can be used for evil as well as Algebra. Statistics are evil! " See when Bush famously said "we have to balance science and morals" i think that statement is incorrect because its the equivelant of saying we have to balance algebra and morals. Science is statistics, thats it. You can't balance statistics, unless you plan to cut its progress, which he is successfully doing. He and his "War on science" Theres a war on everything these says aren't there? hohum, I love humanity, i just wish someone would step up and become a better example.

He works for Hollywood, they are resorting to advertising Reservoir Dogs on forums now. ^_^

Hello Mr. Orange If you come here your favorite movie must be Star Wars, thus your name must be changed to Mr. Binks. Heres your pointy hat and light saber, all sacrificial virgins are recieved by me. Ramen

The problem I believe with Kansas' definition is that anything can become logical with a little finesse and forgeting that it can be basaed on false premise. also natural phenomenon sounds a bit mystical, It suggest to me that science can't be taken seriously. What are others opinions of this definition? EDIT: i think Kansas' definition should be labeled under pseudo-science that way when scientists have to actaully do work they know where not to look.

Their religion is right because they say so. Indie rock is the best because i say so. The Pixies are best because you say so. Its just a matter of personal opinion. we take what we know and make our best judgements. The more knowledge and reasoning you have the better equipped.

Heres a good argument related to what Steve said. Can Christianity be based on reason, faith, or both? I believe Christianity can only be based on faith because it is a paradox. we can't believe by virtue of reason. I think you have to suspend reason for something higher in christianities case.

Socrates might not have existed. I won't put up a fight, i have no problem doubting his existence. thats where many of us differ.

I see were are letting things get to eachother. People make mistakes, and misconceptions all the time. If you want to try to correct them, its best to do it as a friend, its more effective. When people start yelling its just that person not in control of themselves. Some of our group members are younger then others. So those who are older, lets be more patient and tolerent of those younger then we. We don't have to respect eachother, but we have to atleast tolerate one another. Me personally. i think all of us are generally good, we jsut have alot of different views that conflict. We all try to justify what we do pretty much. Maybe this will help those of you who have lost your wit for a moment. Good luck!