Arkansas inflicts child abuse on its school children

[Messianic Israelite]

You didn't answer my questions.

Sorry Heyo, I guess I got carried away with my chain of thought in the last post.

"Are laziness and entitlement the virtues you want your teachings based on?"
You mentioned peer-review. If a paper mentions Yahweh, design, creation, or religion in a favorable light, it will be rejected outright for secular publication. The problem with peer review is that it assumes objectivity is possible. Because every person has a worldview, no one approaches evidence in an objective fashion. Thus peer review has become something of a gatekeeper for the established way of thinking. If someone challenges the status quo, unless they are well established in their field and have a solid following, they will struggle to publish their ideas. Articles that even remotely hint at design, creation, or a creator are simply not allowed by the Darwinian gatekeepers—even when written by fellow evolutionists.

See Peer Review in Creation Research

"And what is your stance on the golden rule?"
The golden rule is a good rule. Yahshua said in Matthew 7:12 "All things therefore whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, even so do ye also unto them: for this is the law and the prophets." This is simply a different way of saying love your neighbour as yourself which is a commandment in the Torah. If everyone treated each other as they would want to be treated, this world would see no murders, no thefts, no adultery etc.

"If religious groups can decide what is taught in science class, can scientists decide what is taught in church?"
I'm not saying religious groups should decide what is taught in science class. Science should be taught by scientists, but creation scientists are scientists too. And in my opinion they have a much better grasp on science than evolutionists. When you have fossils even that yield DNA that is supposedly millions of years old and no explanation to how this could be, you know that there is something wrong with science. Evolutionists know DNA cannot last millions of years, though they are trying to find a mechanism to explain how that apparently has happened rather than questioning the millions of years.

 

[Heyo]

Sorry Heyo, I guess I got carried away with my chain of thought in the last post.

"Are laziness and entitlement the virtues you want your teachings based on?"
You mentioned peer-review. If a paper mentions Yahweh, design, creation, or religion in a favorable light, it will be rejected outright for secular publication.

And rightfully so. The basis of scientific rigour is 1. experiments and 2. established science. If you have a design hypothesis and your experiment is an indicator for that hypothesis it is fit for publishing. But when you presuppose design as if it were established science, it is not.

The problem with peer review is that it assumes objectivity is possible. Because every person has a worldview, no one approaches evidence in an objective fashion. Thus peer review has become something of a gatekeeper for the established way of thinking. If someone challenges the status quo, unless they are well established in their field and have a solid following, they will struggle to publish their ideas. Articles that even remotely hint at design, creation, or a creator are simply not allowed by the Darwinian gatekeepers—even when written by fellow evolutionists.

The thing is that the peer review process is the established method. All science that has made it into the school books has taken that route. Creation "science" has constantly failed. That may be due to a bias in the process but then creation scientists should propose a better process. As it stands now creationists want to circumvent the process entirely.

See Peer Review in Creation Research

This article, read with the right background, says all you need to know.
1. Only a handful of creation "scientists" even attempt to publish creation "science"
2. There is no bias against creation scientists as they have published papers that held up to the standards.
3. The peer review process alone is not perfect. Some papers make it to publication and only get retracted after public scrutiny.

"And what is your stance on the golden rule?"
The golden rule is a good rule. Yahshua said in Matthew 7:12 "All things therefore whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, even so do ye also unto them: for this is the law and the prophets." This is simply a different way of saying love your neighbour as yourself which is a commandment in the Torah. If everyone treated each other as they would want to be treated, this world would see no murders, no thefts, no adultery etc.

"If religious groups can decide what is taught in science class, can scientists decide what is taught in church?"
I'm not saying religious groups should decide what is taught in science class. Science should be taught by scientists, but creation scientists are scientists too.

Not according to real scientists - and they are still the gate keepers. The established process is still to convince the scientists first and not the politicians.

There is also still the possibility to ask the courts if the creation "scientists" can't agree with the real scientists and they feel unfairly treated. That was already done in Kitzmiller vs. Dover and the creation "scientists" failed miserably in making their case.

And in my opinion they have a much better grasp on science than evolutionists. When you have fossils even that yield DNA that is supposedly millions of years old and no explanation to how this could be, you know that there is something wrong with science. Evolutionists know DNA cannot last millions of years, though they are trying to find a mechanism to explain how that apparently has happened rather than questioning the millions of years.

That is, as you admit, your opinion.
Expert opinion and judicial opinion begs to differ. and they together still have the higher authority even over the lawmakers of Arkansas.

 

[ElishaElijah]

@Heyo
This is a good explanation of the serious flaws of evolution-scientist.
Is Evolution Science? - Creation Studies Institute

 

[Heyo]

@Heyo
This is a good explanation of the serious flaws of evolution-scientist.
Is Evolution Science? - Creation Studies Institute

That is a good example why creationists don't understand science - and want to explain science to real scientists. That is, they wouldn't dare to come up with this in a discussion with scientists. They know that this only convinces people who know even less about science than they do.
And it is still off topic as it has nothing to do with Arkansas lawmaker setting themselves up for international ridicule.

I have an open invitation to explain science and the ToE to creationists in Why the Theory of Evolution is True. Part 1: What is Science?. It would be on topic there.

 

[ElishaElijah]

That is a good example why creationists don't understand science - and want to explain science to real scientists. That is, they wouldn't dare to come up with this in a discussion with scientists. They know that this only convinces people who know even less about science than they do.
And it is still off topic as it has nothing to do with Arkansas lawmaker setting themselves up for international ridicule.

I have an open invitation to explain science and the ToE to creationists in Why the Theory of Evolution is True. Part 1: What is Science?. It would be on topic there.

Your comment is comical to me and scientist are wrong a lot, do you believe they publish those examples or critique their own work? I don’t. You and I know that the article brings up questions that scientist can’t answer or prove about the origin of life and have to use a number of billions and billions of years to cover for the deficiency. Evolution defies natural laws and also common sense.

 

[ecco]

Parents should be in control of what their kids are learning in school.

Parents can control what their kids are learning in school. There are thousands of private parochial schools across the country. Public tax dollars should not be used for teaching religious beliefs.



It seems that the meaning of the 1st amendment is lost on many people.

 

[ElishaElijah]

Parents can control what their kids are learning in school. There are thousands of private parochial schools across the country. Public tax dollars should not be used for teaching religious beliefs.



It seems that the meaning of the 1st amendment is lost on many people.

True and also would say that if a parent doesn’t agree with public schools teaching they can opt out of paying taxes in that area and should get a credit for a different school, if not then children should be able to use the facilities, play sports or any other curriculum the parents would allow and agree with. That’s not the case though.[/QUOTE]

 

[ElishaElijah]

Parents can control what their kids are learning in school. There are thousands of private parochial schools across the country. Public tax dollars should not be used for teaching religious beliefs.



It seems that the meaning of the 1st amendment is lost on many people.

Isn’t that like segregation and divisive? We really can’t find a solution? Seems like adults hinder learning only to present one mindset and that’s it, then you throw in 1st Amendment when it’s convenient.

 

[ecco]

Abiogenesis, which is impossible?

5000 years ago people believed it was impossible that the world was round. Ya know, people falling off the bottom and all that. Science, as yet, has not explained abiogenesis. That is no reason to dismiss it.

People also believed that floods and plagues and volcanic eruptions were caused by an angry god. Perhaps you still do.

I haven’t heard any explanation that makes any sense other than the Genesis account, the biblical account of history is the only one I would trust.

The biblical account of history includes the entire world being flooded about 4000 years ago. This is impossible since it has been proven that humans existed before, during, and after this "event". That is just one reason to dismiss the Bible as a historical document.

What education could they possible miss by learning the Bible?

What education could they possibly miss by learning the Koran? What education could they possibly miss by learning the teachings of Buddha or Shiva? I'm all for teaching comparative religions in the 5th or 6th grade. That way, children would come to realize that their god isn't the only one. Is that something you would want?

 

[ecco]

All that’s needed is common sense of a child to realize evolution is false, you still can’t answer basic problems with your theory.

Children do not understand evolution. We can say those children are ignorant of the workings of evolution. Some adults do not understand evolution. We can say those adults are ignorant of the workings of evolution. If adults decide to ignore the teachings of science we can rightfully say they are willfully ignorant.

Ignorance, especially wilfully ignorance, is not a good basis for common sense.

Then there is the empty grave

There are empty graves in Brazil. They aren't empty for long. As soon as they are dug, they are filled with the bodies of people who died from COVID. One reason Brazil has among the highest death rate from COVID is the refusal of its president to believe the science.

Ignorance, especially wilfully ignorance, is very dangerous.

 

[ElishaElijah]

Children do not understand evolution. We can say those children are ignorant of the workings of evolution. Some adults do not understand evolution. We can say those adults are ignorant of the workings of evolution. If adults decide to ignore the teachings of science we can rightfully say they are willfully ignorant.

Ignorance, especially wilfully ignorance, is not a good basis for common sense.





There are empty graves in Brazil. They aren't empty for long. As soon as they are dug, they are filled with the bodies of people who died from COVID. One reason Brazil has among the highest death rate from COVID is the refusal of its president to believe the science.

Ignorance, especially wilfully ignorance, is very dangerous.

You seriously said that with the empty grave? Ok let me try that.
I see a vehicle so my experiment to prove it happened over billions of years by chance and not by an engineer is to get some gasoline, metal shards, rubber, air and a spark. See what happened after the explosion and it cooled? The rubber adhered to the metal so after billions of years and mutations a vehicle appeared. All different kinds too, Toyota, Ford, Chevy etc.

 

[ecco]

True and also would say that if a parent doesn’t agree with public schools teaching they can opt out of paying taxes in that area

You have shown, throughout this thread, an ignorance of science. Now you are showing an ignorance of tax law as well. I have no children in school and I still pay taxes that go toward funding public schools.

On what do you base your assertion that people "can opt-out of paying taxes in that area"?

 

[ElishaElijah]

You have shown, throughout this thread, an ignorance of science. Now you are showing an ignorance of tax law as well. I have no children in school and I still pay taxes that go toward funding public schools.

On what do you base your assertion that people "can opt-out of paying taxes in that area"?

You didn’t understand what I said, if we pay taxes we should be able to participate and use the public facilities and sports programs, or what we do agree with for our children, if not we shouldn’t have to pay the taxes. But that’s not how government has been, Spare me the ignorance comment and learn to read brother or ask questions first, like you did after the ignorance comment.

 

[ecco]

Isn’t that like segregation and divisive? We really can’t find a solution? Seems like adults hinder learning only to present one mindset and that’s it, then you throw in 1st Amendment when it’s convenient.

OK. Let's not be divisive. If you want your God-Creation stories to be taught in public schools, then you must also be OK with having creation stories from all other cultures taught in public schools.

I'm willing to bet that most Creation believing Christians would be very upset if their children were taught the Navajo Creation Story or the Yoruba Creation Story or the Muslim Creation Story or...or...or.

That wouldn't leave any time for the teaching of evolution.


You'd be OK with that, wouldn't you?

 

[ecco]

I see a vehicle so my experiment to prove it happened over billions of years by chance and not by an engineer is to get some gasoline, metal shards, rubber, air and a spark. See what happened after the explosion and it cooled? The rubber adhered to the metal so after billions of years and mutations a vehicle appeared.

Nonsensical arguments like that have been posited by Creationists for generations. However, if you are going to make such an argument, at least be honest enough to give credit to its originator:

“A junkyard contains all the bits and pieces of a Boeing 747, dismembered and in disarray. A whirlwind happens to blow through the yard. What is the chance that after its passage a fully assembled 747, ready to fly, will be found standing there? So small as to be negligible, even if a tornado were to blow through enough junkyards to fill the whole Universe.”

― Fred Hoyle, The Intelligent Universe: A New View of Creation and Evolution​

Do you really believe making arguments from ignorance is a good way to go? Hoyle's comment, and your repetition of it, just show a complete lack of knowledge in more than one field of science. You really don't need to continue to show your level of education. We got it.

 

[ecco]

You didn’t understand what I said, if we pay taxes we should be able to participate and use the public facilities and sports programs, or what we do agree with for our children, if not we shouldn’t have to pay the taxes. But that’s not how government has been, Spare me the ignorance comment and learn to read brother or ask questions first, like you did after the ignorance comment.

You mean the question you didn't answer?

 

[ElishaElijah]

Nonsensical arguments like that have been posited by Creationists for generations. However, if you are going to make such an argument, at least be honest enough to give credit to its originator:

“A junkyard contains all the bits and pieces of a Boeing 747, dismembered and in disarray. A whirlwind happens to blow through the yard. What is the chance that after its passage a fully assembled 747, ready to fly, will be found standing there? So small as to be negligible, even if a tornado were to blow through enough junkyards to fill the whole Universe.”

― Fred Hoyle, The Intelligent Universe: A New View of Creation and Evolution​

Do you really believe making arguments from ignorance is a good way to go? Hoyle's comment, and your repetition of it, just show a complete lack of knowledge in more than one field of science. You really don't need to continue to show your level of education. We got it.

I didn’t know of Hoyle, but it was due to your empty grave comment, totally wrong to bring Covid into that.
Thanks for Hoyle cause his is a lot better, lol

 

[ElishaElijah]

Nonsensical arguments like that have been posited by Creationists for generations. However, if you are going to make such an argument, at least be honest enough to give credit to its originator:

“A junkyard contains all the bits and pieces of a Boeing 747, dismembered and in disarray. A whirlwind happens to blow through the yard. What is the chance that after its passage a fully assembled 747, ready to fly, will be found standing there? So small as to be negligible, even if a tornado were to blow through enough junkyards to fill the whole Universe.”

― Fred Hoyle, The Intelligent Universe: A New View of Creation and Evolution​

Do you really believe making arguments from ignorance is a good way to go? Hoyle's comment, and your repetition of it, just show a complete lack of knowledge in more than one field of science. You really don't need to continue to show your level of education. We got it.

Well, you are saying that random events happened and that’s how we got all of ordered life and that’s impossible for sure. Never happen, yet Noah and the flood certainly did happen because there is a Creator who made sure the account was written down and isn’t bound by His Creation, He can speak things into existence from nothing and exactly what He did in Creation. That is evidenced in what we see right now.

 

[Heyo]

I'm willing to bet that most Creation believing Christians would be very upset if their children were taught the Navajo Creation Story or the Yoruba Creation Story or the Muslim Creation Story or...or...or.

... the Egyptians? Amun masturbating to create the world.
... the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

 

[Polymath257]

There is only 1 creation account that’s true. Biblical version is the only true account.

And the believers of all the other creation accounts say the same thing about their myths.

Your *claim* it is true is not *evidence* of its truth. For that matter, much of what you *claim* is not the result of even eye witness accounts, but of people writing much later about what *other* people supposedly saw. Given that they were writing to convince others of a claim, at least some skepticism should be used towards the writings.