Science teachers on intelligent design.

Let me come back at you with this.

What exactly is IDT?

Is there a singly accepted definition or explanation?

Can we at least agree on what we are talking about between ourselves?

here are a few simple ones

Notice that the gist of these revolve around theological issues. To me, this is an entirely different discussion than the question of where consciousness comes from.

One additional thing that I would like to bring up: There are a number of theories, or questions out there like the relationship between quantum mechanics and consciousness or the oscillating universe theory that straddle the fine line between science and metaphysics. I would have no problem with including ID with these, if, the proponents of ID were willing to allow the ID theory to be subject to the same level of debate and proof.

At this point, I have not seen this to be the case.

In any case, it is also abundantly clear that discussions of Dasien and the electron, quantum mechanics and consciousness, or oscillating universe are highly advanced concepts that are not really appropriate for elementary or even the average high school student.


[edit on 14-11-2005 by HowardRoark]

Originally posted by HowardRoark
What exactly is IDT?

Is there a singly accepted definition or explanation?

Can we at least agree on what we are talking about between ourselves?

Certainly we can, and in fact this is a great place to start. How about this definition: The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained as being derived from an intelligent cause.

Notice that the gist of these revolve around theological issues. To me, this is an entirely different discussion than the question of where consciousness comes from.

Certainly people turning this into a theological issue even though it needn't be, and by definition is not.

And I agree, the fundamental issue of ID is different from the nature of conciousness.

Originally posted by HowardRoark
In any case, it is also abundantly clear that discussions of Dasien and the electron, quantum mechanics and consciousness, or oscillating universe are highly advanced concepts that are not really appropriate for elementary or even the average high school student.

[edit on 14-11-2005 by HowardRoark]

You nail it to the spot, taking in consideration that the average grade student when presented with creation and alternative discussion is going to fall into the debatable ideology.

Gifted children seem more mature to take harder subjects and new subjects like ID, but they are still children and they still bring into the classroom their parents views.

Is very hard to talk about how species originate without falling into the religious discussion when it comes to young children and is always a parent or two that is going to have their own opinion when they happen to be parents that are very involved in what their children learn in schools or what they think is the appropriated subject.

Also the curriculum objective is always left to the teacher to select the best approach.

So the teacher and the particular schools have a lot to do with the choices of subjects to be discuss as not to cause controversy between the schools and parents.

That is why many school districts will by pass evolution is better to avoid the controversy than to ignite a fire, and I see that happening with ID.

It's an unfortunate fact in the history of science that scientists will stick to a theory which is untrue until they get an acceptable alternative theory-which to a Darwinist means a strictly naturalistic theory. So for them, the question is not whether Darwinism is true. The question is whether there is a better theory that's philosophically acceptable. Any suggestion that Darwinism is false, and that we should admit our ignorance about the origin of complex life-forms, is simply unacceptable. In their eyes, Darwinism is the best naturalistic theory, and therefore effectively true. The argument that it's false can't even be heard

You Darwinists make me laugh, your so passionate in your opinions, against the Evil Theory of Intelligent Design, are you telling me that we shouldn't have an Alternative opinion in the Creation of life, and that i or my children shouldn't have a choice?

Your Earth wont be flat forever.

Some of you may or may not be familiar with a new game out for the PC called "The Movies"...

At any rate - A member there by the name of DeusExMachinima pieced this bit together and it's number one in the online community right now....Absolutely hilarious...

Scholastic Films Intelligent Design

Just a little related light-hearted humor to break up the fiery sermons and whatnot....

Originally posted by EnronOutrunHomerun
Scholastic Films Intelligent Design

That is one of the funniest things i've ever seen,
thanks for that EnronOutrunHomerun, and the info regarding "The Movies"

Originally posted by EnronOutrunHomerun
Some of you may or may not be familiar with a new game out for the PC called "The Movies"...

At any rate - A member there by the name of DeusExMachinima pieced this bit together and it's number one in the online community right now....Absolutely hilarious...

Scholastic Films Intelligent Design


Just a little related light-hearted humor to break up the fiery sermons and whatnot....

That was great.

evolution = fascism....but i don't wanna be a Nazi.

And remember kids if evolution were true, i'd have a self-lubricating hand.


[Larry the]I don't care who you are... that's funny right there.[/cable guy]

Definately a nice break from the debate...gotta love satire.

(edit)had to move my 'thumbs up'. Didn't want anyone to think i condone calling evolutionists Nazi's....however funny that may be lol

[edit on 14-11-2005 by Rren]