I think that the Kansas School Board has a point. The theory of evolution is just a theory, much like the theory of gravity, and as such it is not proven and alternatives are possible. For this reason I think it is right that 'inteligent design' is taught. However, it would be wrong to limit the classroom to just one alternative theory. Another equally valid theory is that the universe was created by a Flying Spaghetti Monster. This alternative theory has already received some support from President Bush as well as some of the members of the Kansas School Board.

 

 

 

However this theory violates the first amendment the government will not favor one religion over another and this theory goes against atheism.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ramen Brother!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Are you talking about string theory?

 

 

 

Last I heard it was slowly floating down the charts as nothing about it has been proved yet, and it was just a filler to explain some hadron behavior.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No, string theory is still very much alive. (More accurately the M theory, but I digress.)

 

 

 

They're just waiting until the Large Hadron Collider comes online.

The court verdict in a landmark lawsuit on "intelligent design" is weeks away, but voters in Dover, Pa., delivered their judgment this week by sweeping out eight of nine school board members who decided that ninth-grade science students must be told the concept is an alternative to evolution.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Source

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

At least I have some faith left in the United States. :wink:

I would rather this topic died. I'm sick of discussing this now. Its old news

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The future is secular! Religion does nothing but hold back the development of society

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ahmen

 

 

 

I believe that religion defines a person's morality, usually imprinting itself on them while they are a child.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For example, in my religion (Christianity), the teaching 'Do onto others as you would want them do onto you'. A child taught this idea can easily comprehend what it means - if you and everyone else follows this teaching and you are kind to others, you will receive kindness in return.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now, it is obvious that in 'modern society', not everyone follows ideas such as this (regardless of their religion), because if everyone did, there would be no crime, violence, war... etc

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So perhaps religion is the one thing preventing modern society from crumbling...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I really don't think thatÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s the case, how could similar morality arise from nations that were totally disconnected from the main world. Are you saying that tribal cultures (such as the Aborigines and American Indians) have no morality because they didn't hear the bible's passage of "doing good"? Sure they had their own religion but if every religion teaches the same morality and this morality is documented and passed down by people then wouldn't it be fair to say morality rose from people instead of a higher power?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's exactly the same reasoning for things like culture and language. Did religion tell us how to talk or express ourselves? Then what makes morals different from things such as language and culture, they are just as intangible and subjective as morals.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A pretty simple explanation for helping family members in terms of evolution would be:

 

 

 

ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¦Ã¢â¬ÅPeople who help their relatives may not themselves have so many offspring, but as a result of their behaviour the kin group will have more surviving offspring who will carry the genes of the self-sacrificing individuals. Thus the genes that dispose people to behave that way will not be eliminated by natural selection but will in fact do well in competition with the genes of people who do not help relatives.ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬ÃâÃ

 

 

 

Are you talking about string theory?

 

 

 

Last I heard it was slowly floating down the charts as nothing about it has been proved yet, and it was just a filler to explain some hadron behavior.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The string theory is supposed to support the idea of all 4 major forces being united as they once were trillionths of a second before the big bang into one equation it cannot be proved simply because the strings are just too small to experiment on at this current time. So I doubt string theory has lost anything because string theory was never expected to be proven maybe in the future it could be proven.

 

 

 

 

Are you talking about string theory?

 

 

 

Last I heard it was slowly floating down the charts as nothing about it has been proved yet, and it was just a filler to explain some hadron behavior.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The string theory is supposed to support the idea of all 4 major forces being united as they once were trillionths of a second before the big bang into one equation it cannot be proved simply because the strings are just too small to experiment on at this current time. So I doubt string theory has lost anything because string theory was never expected to be proven maybe in the future it could be proven.

 

 

 

m theory was ment to unite the string theorys and also exsplane the big bang

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/gr/public/qg_ss.html

Time to get this thread back on topic.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I do see the point the Kansas school board has but it is difficult to teach lessions on intelligent design. Any covering of alternite theroies in schools will be kept breif. I'm taking biology this year and I'm not sure how my school treats it, no mention of Evolution (or any alternite theroys) so far just a bunch of stuff about biological chemical reactions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I firmly belive that if religon never existed the human race would have by this time lost its sense of consequence. It would result in one of two extremes. It would either be a total anarchy (possibly resulting in humanity's extinction) because people just don't care, or it would be ruled by some deranged tyrant because people don't know how else to think.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Religon allows people to see that there are things bigger then themselves, so people will contribute more to socitiy. Besides its better to live like there is a god (like I do) and find out there isn't then live like there is no god and find out there is. Plenty of physical evidence has been found supporting the stories in the bible for those who care to look.

Time to get this thread back on topic.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I do see the point the Kansas school board has but it is difficult to teach lessions on intelligent design. Any covering of alternite theroies in schools will be kept breif. I'm taking biology this year and I'm not sure how my school treats it, no mention of Evolution (or any alternite theroys) so far just a bunch of stuff about biological chemical reactions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I firmly belive that if religon never existed the human race would have by this time lost its sense of consequence. It would result in one of two extremes. It would either be a total anarchy (possibly resulting in humanity's extinction) because people just don't care, or it would be ruled by some deranged tyrant because people don't know how else to think.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Religon allows people to see that there are things bigger then themselves, so people will contribute more to socitiy. Besides its better to live like there is a god (like I do) and find out there isn't then live like there is no god and find out there is. Plenty of physical evidence has been found supporting the stories in the bible for those who care to look.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

all i see religion as is an excape from death with heaven and an early form of law that if you break the rules you goto hell forever. humanity would still be here without religion because all life has two goals.

 

 

 

1.survival of the speices

 

 

 

2.survival of oneself

 

 

 

these two factors make selfextinction nearly inposible. many of the storys within the bible have been proven. however early man did not understand much about the world at the time and the bible that we read has been translated many many times into difrent languages so many sections of the bible are misread and asumptions. a good example is mosses and the plegues. in the bible it says he lead the slaves away from Egypt and armys on cheroits were pursuing them so he crosed the red sea. evedince has shown that the red sea was infact a bad tranclation of the read sea so a swamp. in a swamp scientes dicoverd the kings son (the last plegue was the first born died). what they believe happend was mosses lead his people into the swamp and when the armys came him and the slaves killed the kings men and son because the cheoriets they were riding were traped in the swamp and useless. for the most part the story in the bible was correct.[/b]

I'd have to agree with Darkrick, religion and advancement do not go hand in hand. Look at every country in the world that is very, very religious (even bases it's law code possibly on religion). Take a look at The Ayatollah's Iran, take a look at Afghanistan, take a look at medieval Europe, the current Arab nations, Egypt, Syria, ... Wherever in the world religion has a strong grip, freedom of speech is limited, people are tortured on the shadow of a religious book, poverty is high, terrorists emerge, education is low etc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Which hardly is conclusive evidence that religion in some form of all encompassing problem. North Korea is an excellent example that it's quite possible to have both limitations in freedom, being tortured, starved, brainwashed, poor, poorly educated and a source of terrorism without religion. In fact, did you present anything that makes religion in itself a source of the above? Isn't it just as easy to say that what you describe originates from poverty (and fanaticism and fundamentalism aswell), rather than poverty originating from religion?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And the current arab nations... The Ba'ath party is/was a panarab nationalistic socialist party. Iran disliked Saddam because Iraq was secularized.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As for code of laws... What do you think most countries have based their laws on? 18th century philosophers ideas about human value? Hello, we've had a powerful political entity saying "You shall not kill thy fellow men" for over 2000 years! Did our set of moral beliefs magically appear one day? Are they the pinnacle of some scientific development during the past 2000 years?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In part, sure. But would those parts ever have been designed without the moral framework set by religions?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Even though it would still take until about 1900, employees started getting paid well, one by one countries started getting wealthier and the freedom of speech was increased, the right of free assembly was granted, tyrannies were overthrown, people's dwellings became more comfortable, technology enabled things people a few hundred years back could've only dreamed about (hey, not even the mightiest king or emperor in the year 1300 could've even thinked about traveling to the other side of the world in a matter of hours whereas today we take it for granted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Is wealth or technological advancement directly connected to a reduced religious influence? Do they somehow require atheism to appear? The wheel, arguable one of the most important pieces of "technology" in the world was invented while under religious influence. Iran is how far from becoming a nuclear power (and disregarding divine grace, they're obviously doing some form of technological advancement).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Flat out saying "religion is bad" and complete shunning it is disregarding thousands of human history. Humanity today is the sum of that history.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

edit: Writing posts at 7am is leaves sentences that I can't understand, and I wrote them....

There are many scientist today who are holding to the ID theory, "as a theory" Some hold to an alien life form being the intelligent design. This negates the the argument of so called "seperation of church and state" which is not in the constution, but thats another subject. The crux of the matter is that those who wish this alternative to evolution in teaching is This, either present evolution as a theory, not a fact based on suppostions since we were not there at the beginning, or let another viable theory such as ID be presented. In the past this has not been allowed. Instead, there have been cased cited to students in schools to support evolution that have since been proven to be false and misleading. If we are to teach science, then the rules of science must be followed, the main rule being there must be a provable fact to base a conculsion on. The problem with both evolution and ID is there is no real basis for a fact to build on, No one was there to observe the beginning. Either teach evolution and ID as theories or take them both out. Too many biases are ruining the minds of children, on both sides. It just seems that the evolution side is kind of blind to this fact

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:)

religion is not bad it is the lack of tolerence people have over other religions is the problem. the school bord electing to teach the ID theory is them pushing their beliefs onto others.

 

 

 

Is wealth or technological advancement directly connected to a reduced religious influence? Do they somehow require atheism to appear? The wheel, arguable one of the most important pieces of "technology" in the world was invented while under religious influence. Iran is how far from becoming a nuclear power (and disregarding divine grace, they're obviously doing some form of technological advancement).

 

 

 

i do not mean to affend any russians by this statment but their is suffiiciant evedince that russia is selling nukes to others. also the concept of a nuke is not very hard the only problem is to aquire the fuel.their are 2 types on fission bombs

 

 

 

1.core is imploded

 

 

 

2.very simular to a gun

 

 

 

if you look on the net you can find how to make almost any wepon (everythimg from a firecracker to am fussion bobm and emp bomb). scarry ant it? people can easly discover how to incenerate their hometown or nock a planes computers offline from 30,000 feet bellow. the reasion that we have yet to see this stuff is that people will notice when a few pounds of urraniulm goes missing