Neil W Rickert wrote:

ianparker2@gmail.com writes:

Personally I think Evolution should be taught in Biology and ID (or
possibly some infinite theory) taught in Computer Science. This would
surely be the best preparation.

No, keep it out of computer science. It no more belongs there than
it belongs in biology.

No exactly true... In fact it PROVES Intelligent design.

Take two computers on one place a program in it that will
write a computer program using Randomly generated Binary
code.

Neil W Rickert wrote:

ianparker2@gmail.com writes:

Personally I think Evolution should be taught in Biology and ID (or
possibly some infinite theory) taught in Computer Science. This would
surely be the best preparation.

No, keep it out of computer science. It no more belongs there than
it belongs in biology.

No exactly true... In fact it PROVES Intelligent design.

Take two computers on one place a program in it that will
write a computer program using Randomly generated Binary
code.

On the other a program that utilizes every known scientific/
Mathematical theory & law to create a life sustaining planet
& evolve life forms on that planet capable of surviving
on it.


Now Right there you have PROVEN Intelligent design as FACT.
the act of programming can only be done via Intelligent
Design & NOT by randomly generated 1s & 0s.

Neil W Rickert wrote:

ianparker2@gmail.com writes:

Personally I think Evolution should be taught in Biology and ID (or
possibly some infinite theory) taught in Computer Science. This would
surely be the best preparation.

No, keep it out of computer science. It no more belongs there than
it belongs in biology.

Not true. Intelligent design is a key word for a trend in program design...

(nonsense skipped>

Evolution alone is like throwing paint at a canvas & expecting
to eventually become a landscape painting. It just ain't gonna
happen. for one to paint a landscape with a building, Trees, a
clouded sky & a snow capped mountain paint must be mixed in the
proper colors & applyed at the proper moment one step at a time.

Well then that right there should ban evolution. Darwin took two
things that looked alike & said one evolved from another. From
that day on schools have taught this fantasy that Man evolved
from apes because Apes and Man look alike.

Creation is like an artist at work. the Artist molds the medium
to form a work of art. A statue does not evolve from a chunk of
rock. A plate does not "Evolve from a lump of clay". ID is a Fact
you folks MUST ignore to prove a theory as fact.

Ron O wrote:

ianparker2@gmail.com wrote:

As far as can be made out it is difficult to tell the difference at an
elementary level. The basic question is can random mutations + natural
selection provide a complete Theory of Everything (including
Intelligence) without any other input.

I think most people would agree that the fossil record should be taught
as the basic rubric. Also the fate of all the various AI projects that
have taken place should also be taught. If nothing else, to make sure
the mistakes are not repeated.

Personally I think Evolution should be taught in Biology and ID (or
possibly some infinite theory) taught in Computer Science. This would
surely be the best preparation.

Ron,
You narrow minded atheist fundies crack me up... Free Thinkers my fat
*****.

Since there is no such thing as a scientific theory of ID what would
you teach and why?

This right here is the entire problem... here is the logic of your
thinking... "The earth is like a Giant flat plate because everytime I
turn around I see a continuous curve."

Now you folks take this "fact" & build a religeon out of it.

Here is another example of Darwin logic. "A Tricycle has three wheels
therefore if a pilot gets into a craft with three wheels he is flying a
three wheeled bike."

The worst thing is you folks pass as FACT that every vehicle that has
three wheels is a child's bike. Then you ignore other facts as they do
not fit your belief.

Would you represent it honestly and how would you do this?

Far more honestly than you would. How? I'd start the class this way.
"Science is mans quest to place order in the universe. It's role is to
teach us HOW and WHY things work. This year we will discuss how things
came to be via two theories. One Evolution, The other Creation.
You will be expected to examine these rationally, logically &
Scientifically. Your role as future scientists is NOT to state one side
is fact but to discover if one OR BOTH are correct. A Scientist MUST be
willing to ASK QUESTIONS & SEEK answers through extensive research."

Unfounded assertions do not make a theory. Why should they
be taught if they don't have a foundation?

Well then that right there should ban evolution. Darwin took two
things that looked alike & said one evolved from another. From
that day on schools have taught this fantasy that Man evolved
from apes because Apes and Man look alike.

Creation is like an artist at work. the Artist molds the medium
to form a work of art. A statue does not evolve from a chunk of
rock. A plate does not "Evolve from a lump of clay". ID is a Fact
you folks MUST ignore to prove a theory as fact.

You keep acting like there is something to teach,

There is for those who SEEK answers & not accept as "fact"
ANYTHING that sounds good.

but even the scam artists haven't come up with
anything to teach.

Again very incorrect. the First question to be asked is this.
If you was to create a universe what would you need to know?

Where is your lesson plan.

From asking questions then seeking the answers ot those questions
without ASSUMING that becuase someone like you "THINKS" they know
"everything about everything" states their belief is scientific
fact does NOT make it so.

What are you going to teach?

The kids wil learn what Science REALLY is about. That is to Ask
questions & discover the answers.

Creationism will be the key to terraforming as well as open
new fields of research & scientific theories.

How are you going to teach it? What do you expect the students
to learn from the lesson and how will you evaluate if the students have
learned it?

the same way evolution is taught.

Why do you think that there isn't a single one of the ID
scam artist Wedgies have ever put forward a simple lesson plan to
demonstrate that they had anything worth teaching?

THey have you Darwin Fanatics choose to only accept what you like as
fact. It's like picking out the cashews in a can of mixed nuts then
throwing away what you don't like.

Where is Meyer's
lesson plan? Where is Dembski's lesson plan? Where is West's lesson
plan? Why hasn't the Discovery Institute with all its "brain" power
ever been able to come up with a lesson plan?

If you think that you can do what these guys don't want to do or can't
do honestly, just give it a try and find out why.

Have you bothered to do ANY research or is this another stupid belief in
a half-truth?

Look I am nowhere near a bible Scholar. I have not read it cover to
cover & memorized it. That said I can truely say that from my position
I can see the issue more clearly. I am no content in accepting something
as mindlessly as you.

I do not believe God is infinatly wise or absolute perfection. Hell
the Bible proves this wrong. Somewhere in the bible there is a quote
that goes something like "My (God's) time is not your time."

This alone is a MAJOR clue... not to mention one of the top One Hundred
Questions.

We know for a fact that time on the ISS is NOT the same as how you or I
see it. We also Know that 1 day on each of the other eight planets in
our solar system is NOT 24 hours or 1 year on the other nine planets is
NOT always 365 days.

Lets take 2 planets... Planet A has a revolution of 37 hours
Planet B is 24 hours. Planet A is 17 hours longer than Planet B.
therefor a Planet B year on Planet A would be about 258 days
5 hrs. 4 min. 17 sec. LONGER than on Planet B. about 1.4 years
longer.

Now if you based everything on B Time then it will NOT come out
correct on Planet A right?

So rather than use our time scale the question is how long will
it take you to travel SIX light years. As the convertion here is
extremely confusing for me lets just take what I've estimate (If
anyone of you can be more exact go for it.)

by my estimation the age of the universe is about 189,216,000+
years. i light year per day scale. If it is more like 1 light year
per second then multiply that by how many seconds are in 6 days.

But lets run with my figure... It may have taken 189,216,000
years in OUR time yet only 6 days (144 hours) in God's time.

I believe this time frame should be more acceptable for you on
the pro evolution side.

I believe the actions God takes MUST follow the Rules of
Science. IOW God can not create a rotating planet without
Gravity. It HAS to either be in rotation or not.
So Can evolution exsist outside creation or Creation
outside Evolution? NO! As this would violate a yet to be
discovered law of science.

Look at evolution as more a sculptur working with a
plyable medium... Like clay or glass. One does not
blow once and form a perfect Glass Vase. It MUST evolve
over time with changes.

So rather than something happening by Chance the design was
tweaked & altered until it became the object desired.

Evolution alone is like throwing paint at a canvas & expecting
to eventually become a landscape painting. It just ain't gonna
happen. for one to paint a landscape with a building, Trees, a
clouded sky & a snow capped mountain paint must be mixed in the
proper colors & applyed at the proper moment one step at a time.

This is Creationism & Intellegent Design at work. As the Painting
goes from blank canvas to a work of art it MUST evolve.

Evolution is a REQUIRED process in Intellegent Design.

So does it prove one side over the other? NO it proves BOTH MUST
co-exsist.

Here is the biggest issue you eveolutionists have... You can not
seperate God from religeon. God does not exsist because of religion
he exsists via science.

So how about this... Rather than looking at God as a Minister look at
him as a scientist. By doing this you will begin to see the gaps
in Evolutionary Science filled with Creation Science.


Now as we learn more about Mars we discover life may have
exsisted on the planet... So at one time there was TWO planets
that held life in the solor system.

What IF Earth was never ment to hold human life? What if humans
were suposed to live on Mars? Well that would make THIS planet
Mars & Mars- Earth. Now the bible makes two major exsistance altering
references.

The first when Adam & Eve were kicked out of the Garden of Eden &
the second Noah's Flood.

Only now do we understand Genetic manipulation & limited cloning.
Both of these were IMPOSSIBLE in Darwins time.

In closing there IS proof of Intellegent Design in nature you just need
to be willing to look.

The same goes for the bible literallists... they have to be open to the
possibility that in the act of creation God tweaked & altered things
untill it was perfect in HIS view.

So If we were created in God's Image then God is Humanoid in appearance.


Something to think about.

Ike

Oh due to the length of this post I'm not going to bother running
my spell checker so do expect spelling errors.