Subject:
|
Re: Support for Creationism (was Re: Macro-Evolution - "Impossible!")
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 25 Jan 2001 06:19:04 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
736 times
|
| |
|
|
Tim Culberson wrote:
>
> Jennifer Clark wrote:
> Dr. Kent Hovind in one of his seminars describes how he collects school
> text books with blatantly incorrect claims.
Schoolbooks due suffer from a variety of errors. This however is not
because Darwinian Evolution is wrong, but rather because the people writing
the books are more interested in selling them then getting their facts
right.
> > [1] His bet is pretty hokey anyway; I thought it was a different "point
> > [3"
> > in my other post, but essentially one has to prove that evolution is
> > responsible for the creation of the universe. Since neither Darwinian
> > Evolution nor anything else can be observed before "t0" (the creation of
> > the universe) due to the aforementioned singularity, it is *impossible*
> > (for anyone in our universe) to prove what he requests. Dr Dino has
> > perhaps the safest bet in the galaxy.
>
> Exactly. So why is it that the Evolutionary theory is so widely
> accepted and taught in our public schools with no mention of its
> *possible* downfalls?
For the same reason the the theory of gravity is, and the standard model
is, and the wave/particle duality is, etc.
Kids are generally not good scientists, and can only see things in black
and white. So we give the best start we can along the best guess we have by
presenting it as the TRUTH, and hope that they will also devlop some
critical thinking skills along the way so can accept new good data, reject
bad data, and be able to create new hypotheses, and test them on their own.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
78 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
