Some clown who says he's a former biology teacher wrote an op-ed piece in today's local paper claiming that evolution is an "adult fairy tale." He thinks that to be fair all kinds of ideas should be presented in the classroom so that students can "think critically and draw their own conclusions." I wonder if that would include the evidence for The Great Spaghetti Monster? Do you think he would think it "fair" to include Muslim beliefs about the origin of life? Or how about the beliefs of the Aztecs? Why not include Hindu traditions?If he was a biology teacher, he must have been home-schooled, and he must have taught at some "religious" academy!
This misguided soul goes on to say that "Intelligent Design can be taught without bringing God into the classroom." Sorry, that is 100% wrong. But, even if it were true, Intelligent Design is not science, has no scientific support, and is rejected outright by 99.9 percent of scientists around the world. The only so-called "scientists" who support ID are unable to get their papers published in any reputable scientific journal!
He claims that because Intelligent Design is barred from science classrooms "academia" (whatever that means) is being dishonest. The truth is actually the opposite. To claim that Intelligent Design is not religious at its core is fundamentally fraudulent. One cannot have Intelligent Design without an Intelligent Designer, and once you've said that you've postulated what can only be described as a deity, and thus proven that ID is all about religion and has nothing to do with science.
This writer, frustrated because he can't insert his "god" into public school science classrooms, says that "evolution is a religion and those who preach it and practice it bow down to their own God."
He isn't only ignorant about science in general, he's also totally ignorant about both religion and evolution. Evolution, of course, is simply a scientific way of discussing the origins of life. Because it is the only scientific theory as to the origin of life that works, i.e., can be demonstrated and verified, it is the theory that scientists use as a model to study the planet and its people.
Evolution does not posit a deity for it has no need to do so. God, so to speak, does not enter into the equation. But, because it is a scientific theory and not religious hokum, if there should arise evidence for the involvement of a deity in the origination of life, the theory of evolution would necessarily be modified to include that deity.
Religion has nothing to do with science and has nothing to do with evolution. Religion references beliefs and suppositions which cannot be proven but are matters of faith. That's not necessarily bad, but as we know there are many religions and many gods and all of them claim to be the one true faith. That cannot be. If one is true, all the rest are false. But we have no method of determining which one, if any, is true. There is no "evidence" for any of them. Thus, for a believer, it all comes down to a choice and faith. I can believe in Zeus, Osiris, Mithras, Caesar, Yahweh, Jesus, Christ, or any other "divine" figure, but I do so with no verifiable proof of my god's validity.
To claim evolution is a religion is irredeemable stupidity. We must hope to whatever deity you choose to believe in that this guy never ends up in a public school classroom!
4 comments:
You may as well get really upset:
THE BIGGER PICTURE IN THE DEBATE ON DARWINISM IS NOT INTELLIGENT DESIGN.
The reason is elementary: the Discovery Institute and other ID proponents leave out the Triune God, Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. Hence, Richard Dawkins can make the case for “aliens” seeding the earth.
The Quest for Right, a series of 7 textbooks created for the public schools, represents the ultimate marriage between an in-depth knowledge of biblical phenomena and natural and physical sciences. The several volumes have accomplished that which, heretofore, was deemed impossible: to level the playing field between those who desire a return to physical science in the classroom and those who embrace the theory of evolution. The Quest for Right turns the tide by providing an authoritative and enlightening scientific explanation of natural phenomena which will ultimately dethrone the unprofitable Darwinian view.
"I am amazed at the breadth of the investigation - scientific history, biblical studies, geology, biology, geography, astronomy, chemistry, paleontology, and so forth - and find the style of writing to be quite lucid and aimed clearly at a general, lay audience." ― Mark Roberts, former Editor of Biblical Reference Books, Thomas Nelson Publishers.
The Quest for Right series of books, based on physical science, the old science of cause and effect, has effectively dismantled the quantum additions to the true architecture of the atom. Gone are the nonexistent particles once thought to be complementary to the electron and proton (examples: neutrons, neutrinos, photons, mesons, quarks, Z's, bosons, etc.) and a host of other pseudo particles.
To the curious, scientists sought to explain Atomic theory by introducing fantastic particles that supposedly came tumbling out of the impact between two particles, when in fact, the supposed finds were simply particulate debris. There are only two elementary particles which make up the whole of the universe: the proton and electron. All other particles were added via quantum magic and mathematical elucidation in an attempt to explain earthly phenomena without God.
Introducing the scheme of coincidence, which by definition, "is the systematic ploy of obstructionists who, in lieu of any divine intervention, state that any coincidental grouping or chance union of electrons and protons (and neutrons), regardless of the configuration, always produces a chemical element. This is the mischievous tenet of electron interpretation which states that all physical, chemical, and biological processes result from a change in the electron structure of the atom which, in turn, may be deciphered through the orderly application of mathematics, as outlined in quantum mechanics. A few of the supporting theories are: degrading stars, neutron stars, black holes, extraterrestrial water, antimatter, the absolute dating systems, and the big bang, the explosion of a singularity infinitely smaller than the dot of an “i” from which space, time, and the massive stellar bodies supposedly sprang into being.
The Quest for Right is not only better at explaining natural phenomena, but also may be verified through testing. As a consequence, the material in the several volumes will not violate the so-called constitutional separation of church and state. Physical science, the old science of cause and effect, will have a long-term sustainability, replacing irresponsible doctrines based on whim. Teachers and students will rejoice in the simplicity of earthly phenomena when entertained by the new discipline.
http://questforright.com
So, Mr. Parsons, the problem is not that ID is disguised religion, it's that ID doesn't have the right religion--it needs your "truth" which includes a Triune God - Father, Jesus, and a Holy Ghost.
It is truly scary how some minds work. You've got 7 textbooks "created for the public schools" which provide "an in-depth knowledge of biblical phenomena and natural and physical sciences."
You've lost it right there. Your Quest for Right is just another religious scam to present the case for a deity dressed up in scientific clothes. In the public schools we don't give a fig about "in-depth knowledge of biblical phenomena!" There may be differences between your "quest" and ID but in the end it doesn't matter at all because you really want to bring your "triune" god into public school classrooms and that, my friend, you are forbidden to do under the law of the land!
Sell you books to homeschoolers who can pretty much study whatever nonsense they want to, or to "religious" schools that teach everything from a "biblical" perspective, but please leave the public schools the hell alone.
Why do insist on foisting your religious beliefs on everyone else?
And isn't it interesting that in spite of the wonder of your "quest" the huge majority of the world's scientists would still consider you to be a flake?
Of, that's right, they don't believe in the Triune god so they must be wrong about evolution. Or maybe they are all evil anti-Christs? Or maybe Satan has entered their bodies and calcified their souls.
Have a nice day!
Jacob
One more thing, Mr. Parsons. For you to quote someone biblical reference person from Thomas Nelson Publishers, is like getting the Pope to quote from one of his encyclicals.
Thomas Nelson is an unabashedly Christian (in the "evangelical/fundamentalist" sense) publisher.
Did Thomas Nelson publish your Quest material?
Nice try, though. It just doesn't cut any ice quoting someone who buys milk from the same cow you do.
Jacob
Why do we not also teach the origins of man as per Hinduism, Buddhism, Scientology, and a host of other religions that have also many believers? Scientology is very up to date and includes space travel among other theories. Each has many books and scholars explaining their “facts” as to how the world began. Each has new converts everyday. How do we know which is correct? I guess science is one answer. So far, we have no evidence that anyone has ever ascended to Heaven or even that Heaven exists. We do know that Mars and other places do and are older than the Bible. We may believe but cannot prove. We explain things by declaring them to be true. That is not science. We can believe there was a virgin birth but can not find any evidence of such a thing. We can believe all sorts of things. I believe my kids are better than yours and no IQ test will ever convince me that I am wrong. My belief is quite good enough for me.
This argument keeps going on and some will never change their mind. That’s fine as long as they keep their beliefs to themselves and others that agree with them. Think what medicine would be if we stuck only to belief. Think of the world without questioning and seeking proof over belief. It is conceivable that God directed all the scientists that discovered anything. Why isn’t that possible?
Bob Poris
Post a Comment