RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (3) < [1] 2 3 >   
  Topic: 4 Questions For Skeptic, FtK and VMartin, They're easy yes/no questions too!< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Mr_Christopher



Posts: 1238
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 06 2007,16:13   

Quote (VMartin @ Nov. 06 2007,16:03)
Quote (Mr_Christopher @ Nov. 06 2007,14:05)
Skeptic, FtK and VMartin I have a couple of questions for you.

Do you

1) Deny/doubt the HIV=AIDS relationship

2) Deny/doubt global warming

3) Believe ID ("certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection...") is a scientific theory.

4) Believe ID should be taught in public high school science class.

These are pretty easy questions and each only requires a yes/no answer.  I have no desire to debate/deconstruct your answers or suggest your answers are right or wrong.  I'm just curious about where you stand on these issues.

Thanks in advance for your answers!

Chris

ps.  PLEASE FOLKS DO NOT ATTEMPT TO ANSWER FOR SKEPTIC, FtK OR VMARTIN.  Thank you.

Point 1) and 2) is something I don't know much about. No opinion.

3,4) If a (neo)darwinism is a scientific theory I don't see a reason why telepathy and astrology are not also taught at school.

Anyway some basics of religion should be taught at schools for those childrens whose parents are fanatic atheists or neodarwinists and do not talk with their children about religion which formed thinking of our grand parents and our predecessors more than 1.000 years so intensively

Also children should know some other evolutionary approaches as well - it means ID, orthogenesis etc., and their basic arguments - if they want to study it outside school. They should be taught more facts about "natural selection" and what some great scientists thought of it. They should be taught about living organisms and Nature  from some different point of view, which is much more sensitive and have more sympathy for life as those reductionist concepts of "struggle for survival", "selfish gene" etc...
Such concepts  have harmful effect on youngsters on my opinion. Whats more such concepts are unscientific. Such concepts spoils the perception of beauty of living world, where "struggle for life" and "natural selection" obviously play no main role, but creativeness of life itself.

You answered two questions and used the others as a spring board for your anti-evolution ideas.

I was hoping to get yes/no answers for all the questions I asked.  FtK was able to do so, can you try again?

Chris

--------------
Uncommon Descent is a moral cesspool, a festering intellectual ghetto that intoxicates and degrades its inhabitants - Stephen Matheson

  
  66 replies since Nov. 06 2007,14:05 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (3) < [1] 2 3 >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]