Should we teach both Evolution and Intelligent Design in science classes?

Should we teach both and let the students decide for themselves?

 

Go

Message 1 of 170
Latest reply
169 REPLIES 169

Re: Should we teach both Evolution and Intelligent Design in science classes?


@the_bob_delusion wrote:

@secondhand-wonderland wrote:

@i-need-a-martini wrote:

Not sure what school you went to but I doubt very much that even a mention of 'god' comes up in a science class on biological evolution. There is really no need for it to be addressed.

 

It certainly isn't part of the curriculum in public schools unless part of religion. Ad even then I am sure they aren't allowed to promote it.


The teachers didn't have to mention God.  We already had it in our minds that once we learnt about evolution, we would be able to prove that God didn't create us.  

 

They dont need to promote it because by default it directly opposes Christianity.  Kids mostly talk outside of the classroom...


What you don't realise is, you can be religious and still believe evolution. 

 

I'm so glad you just said that.  It's refreshing to see an athiest admit to evolution being a belief system 😉

 

Message 101 of 170
Latest reply

Re: Should we teach both Evolution and Intelligent Design in science classes?

Why did God give us the human appendix, the only function of which is to further enrich a surgeon's coffers?

 

On the other hand, pehaps some time in the past, it did have a function........

Message 102 of 170
Latest reply

Re: Should we teach both Evolution and Intelligent Design in science classes?


@secondhand-wonderland wrote:

@i-need-a-martini wrote:


So how can they be "indoctrinated" if (as you yourself point out) you have made assumptions about what they were leaving OUT of your science class?

 

It seems to me you went into that classroom already "indoctrinated" by religion and a closed mind.


They are indoctrinated because theories are presented as hard facts, absolute truths if you like. 

 

Please dont resort to personal judgements.  I actually found the classes to be fascinating in high school and in university.  You have no idea how I was raised or how open or closed my mind is.  When debating someone try not to resort to ad hominem attacks, it's the first sign of intellectual weakness...


Actually science is rarely presented as hard facts. Facts in science have foundations that can be proven. Nothing more. Nothing less.

 

In regards to how open your mind was or wasn't  in high school, I have no idea. I can only go by your statement about how you approached the learning in your classroom. You stated that you 'knew', by ommission, that the class on evolution was by default saying god didn't exist. That means you brought your own accepted set of beliefs into the classroom and weren't prepared to accept that there could be an opposite view. That is the very  definitiono f indoctrination isn't it?.

 

Message 103 of 170
Latest reply

Re: Should we teach both Evolution and Intelligent Design in science classes?


@this-one-time-at-bandcamp wrote:

Why did God give us the human appendix, the only function of which is to further enrich a surgeon's coffers?

 

On the other hand, pehaps some time in the past, it did have a function........


Yes, when we were animals. It got left behind whn we EVOLVED into humans.Smiley Tongue

Message 104 of 170
Latest reply

Re: Should we teach both Evolution and Intelligent Design in science classes?

What you don't realise is, you can be religious and still believe evolution. 

 

I'm so glad you just said that.  It's refreshing to see an athiest admit to evolution being a belief system

 

What is your definition of a 'belief system?

Many religious people accept the theory of evolution, but they believe evolution started via biogenesis - that the first, microbial  life was created by God and evolved over billions of years into all the species we see today.

They do not believe evolution started via abiogenesis - that the first microbial life evolved from nonliving matter and was not created by God.. 

 

Message 105 of 170
Latest reply

Re: Should we teach both Evolution and Intelligent Design in science classes?

WRONG! It has been found that the Appendix does indeed have a function - so your theory that it did have a function in the past but was evolved out of use - IS FALSE.

 

Loren G. Martin, professor of physiology at Oklahoma State University, replies:

"For years, the appendix was credited with very little physiological function. We now know, however, that the appendix serves an important role in the fetus and in young adults. Endocrine cells appear in the appendix of the human fetus at around the 11th week of development. These endocrine cells of the fetal appendix have been shown to produce various biogenic amines and peptide hormones, compounds that assist with various biological control (homeostatic) mechanisms. There had been little prior evidence of this or any other role of the appendix in animal research, because the appendix does not exist in domestic mammals.

"Among adult humans, the appendix is now thought to be involved primarily in immune functions. Lymphoid tissue begins to accumulate in the appendix shortly after birth and reaches a peak between the second and third decades of life, decreasing rapidly thereafter and practically disappearing after the age of 60. During the early years of development, however, the appendix has been shown to function as a lymphoid organ, assisting with the maturation of B lymphocytes (one variety of white blood cell) and in the production of the class of antibodies known as immunoglobulin A (IgA) antibodies. Researchers have also shown that the appendix is involved in the production of molecules that help to direct the movement of lymphocytes to various other locations in the body.

"In this context, the function of the appendix appears to be to expose white blood cells to the wide variety of antigens, or foreign substances, present in the gastrointestinal tract. Thus, the appendix probably helps to suppress potentially destructive humoral (blood- and lymph-borne) antibody responses while promoting local immunity. The appendix--like the tiny structures called Peyer's patches in other areas of the gastrointestinal tract--takes up antigens from the contents of the intestines and reacts to these contents. This local immune system plays a vital role in the physiological immune response and in the control of food, drug, microbial or viral antigens. The connection between these local immune reactions and inflammatory bowel diseases, as well as autoimmune reactions in which the individual's own tissues are attacked by the immune system, is currently under investigation.

"In the past, the appendix was often routinely removed and discarded during other abdominal surgeries to prevent any possibility of a later attack of appendicitis; the appendix is now spared in case it is needed later for reconstructive surgery if the urinary bladder is removed. In such surgery, a section of the intestine is formed into a replacement bladder, and the appendix is used to re-create a 'sphincter muscle' so that the patient remains continent (able to retain urine). In addition, the appendix has been successfully fashioned into a makeshift replacement for a diseased ureter, allowing urine to flow from the kidneys to the bladder. As a result, the appendix, once regarded as a nonfunctional tissue, is now regarded as an important 'back-up' that can be used in a variety of reconstructive surgical techniques. It is no longer routinely removed and discarded if it is healthy.

Message 106 of 170
Latest reply

Re: Should we teach both Evolution and Intelligent Design in science classes?


@secondhand-wonderland wrote:

@the_bob_delusion wrote:


What you don't realise is, you can be religious and still believe evolution. 

 

I'm so glad you just said that.  It's refreshing to see an athiest admit to evolution being a belief system 😉

 


I don't think he admitted to any such thing lol. I think that is just wishful thinking on your part...

Message 107 of 170
Latest reply

Re: Should we teach both Evolution and Intelligent Design in science classes?


@i-need-a-martini wrote:

@this-one-time-at-bandcamp wrote:

Why did God give us the human appendix, the only function of which is to further enrich a surgeon's coffers?

 

On the other hand, pehaps some time in the past, it did have a function........


Yes, when we were animals. It got left behind whn we EVOLVED into humans.Smiley Tongue


RUBBISH! Read my post on actually use of appendix.

Message 108 of 170
Latest reply

Re: Should we teach both Evolution and Intelligent Design in science classes?


@rabbitearbandicoot wrote:

WRONG! It has been found that the Appendix does indeed have a function - so your theory that it did have a function in the past but was evolved out of use - IS FALSE.

 

Loren G. Martin, professor of physiology at Oklahoma State University, replies:

"For years, the appendix was credited with very little physiological function. We now know, however, that the appendix serves an important role in the fetus and in young adults. Endocrine cells appear in the appendix of the human fetus at around the 11th week of development. These endocrine cells of the fetal appendix have been shown to produce various biogenic amines and peptide hormones, compounds that assist with various biological control (homeostatic) mechanisms. There had been little prior evidence of this or any other role of the appendix in animal research, because the appendix does not exist in domestic mammals.

 

__________
Actually that "theory" has yet to be proven. Smiley Wink



Message 109 of 170
Latest reply

Re: Should we teach both Evolution and Intelligent Design in science classes?

Anyway, it's nearly tomorrow so I'm going to bed. Good night all. 

Message 110 of 170
Latest reply