Updated 12:47 pm.EST, Sun November 22, 2009

Education|Thu, Nov. 20 2008 09:17 AM EST

Texas Reviews 'Weaknesses' of Evolution Teaching Mandate

By Lawrence Jones|Christian Post Reporter

The Texas Board of Education on Wednesday heard public arguments for and against a current science standard that requires students to be taught the "strengths and weaknesses" of evolution.

The State Board is looking to update its state science standards and will vote on new guidelines next spring. The hearing on Wednesday was open to public comments on the proposed revisions to the state's science curriculum.

The current science guidelines, known as Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills, or TEKS, require that students be taught the "strengths and weaknesses" of all scientific theories, including evolution.

The board is considering whether to retain the current mandate, change the language to say "strengths and limitations," or eliminate the reference altogether, as a review panel had recommended.

Despite being just three words long, the phrase has stirred up a heated debate among educators, parents, and interest groups.

Those who support retaining the decade-old reference say it provides students a balanced viewpoint on evolution and allows them a chance to come to their own conclusions.

Those who oppose keeping the current standard say the "weaknesses" language undermines evolution while opening the door for religious teachings like creationism in the classroom.

A majority of board members are in favor of retaining the "strengths and weaknesses" requirement. They dismiss concerns by critics who say the board's intent is to sneak religion into the classroom.

"There's no one on this board that is trying to inject intelligent design or creationism," Board Vice Chairman David Bradley told the Houston Chronicle. "They are trying to whip up into a frenzy over something that is not going to happen. But by trying to remove strengths and weaknesses, yes, they will get a fight."

Around 90 people had signed up to testify before the board on Wednesday, The Associated Press reported.

Steven Schafersman with Texas Citizens for Science urged the board to remove the reference, saying, "Scientific theories are strong. They don't have weaknesses," according to AP.

Jonathan Saenz, a lobbyist for the Texas Free Market Foundation, wanted the reference to stay.

"This is just another attempt to stifle academic freedom and to ban any kind of free and open science inquiry on this issue," Saenz, who had planned to testify, told AP.

Critics of the reference say the "weaknesses" requirement harms science education. But Casey Luskin, a spokesman for the Seattle-based Discovery Institute, a think tank on intelligent design, said the requirement actually helps academics.

"It's a facade to pretend that there are no scientific weaknesses of evolution, and not teaching the scientific weaknesses to students will prevent them from learning about the facts of biology, and it will harm their critical thinking skills," Luskin told the Chronicle.

A survey released last week of science professors from public and private universities in the state found that 95 percent of respondents said they want evolution to be the only theory of the origin of life taught in public schools. A vast majority of those surveyed also said students would be harmed if the state requires the teaching of the "weaknesses" of evolution.

Proponents of keeping the "strengths and weaknesses" language, however, have downplayed the survey, saying a "culture of intimidation" prevents scientists from voicing any objections to evolution. They also point out that it was conducted for Texas Freedom Network, an organization which has actively lobbied for the teaching of evolution in public schools.

"It’s a self-selecting survey," Luskin told the Star-Telegram. "There’s a well-documented culture of intimidation that makes scientists uncomfortable expressing their doubts about Darwinism. This just serves to reinforce that climate of intimidation."

The new science standards adopted by the board next year will remain in place for the next decade.

Sort by: Newest | Oldest | Agree | Disagree
All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Christian Post or its staff.
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8
  • Tue Dec 09, 2008 10:55 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    agent, you wrote:
    "The records Manetho left with regards to the dates between 60--800 BC which correlated to the 21-24 dynasties in no way supports a noachian flood. You're the one who's attempting to twist things here."

    Sorry, you're the one misreading and twisting my words. In the few comments I've added to this story, I wrote about Egyptian chronology only; I never wrote anything about a flood.

    Again, you must be confusing me with someone else. Go back and read closely, and you will see for yourself: I never wrote anything about a flood in reference to this article.

    Good night, agent, and have a great weekend. I'll catch you next week.

  • Mon Dec 08, 2008 11:58 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    Got it, it flopped around on limited limbs. It didn't have to *walk* in a typical sense, and yes, they acknowledge this.

    "he postulates those dynasties existed only in Manetho's mind. Got it? Stop twisting my words already."

    The records Manetho left with regards to the dates between 60--800 BC which correlated to the 21-24 dynasties in no way supports a noachian flood. You're the one who's attempting to twist things here.

  • Fri Dec 05, 2008 11:08 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    Agent, I'm going to give this one more try before giving up. Please read my words carefully; read what I write, not what you think I wrote.
    1. Acanthostega- I don't care what it was. My point was you think you, with your computer background, know better than Coates, et al. That's amazing.

    2. Peter James + Dynasties 21-24: I never said there were no global events 800-600 BC, nor did Peter James. He questions their existence because they left no records though literacy was all around them; he postulates those dynasties existed only in Manetho's mind. Got it? Stop twisting my words already.

  • Fri Dec 05, 2008 7:38 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    "Peter James claimed that the reason there are no records for Dynasties 21-24 is that they did not exist."

    Here's the problem though, the timing at which the Egyptian Dynasties 21-24 took place would have been around 600-800 BC, and regardless of Egyptian records, we have tons of other civilizations which kept records well over 1000 years prior to this. Regardless if the Egyptians didn't document this time period, or if it didn't survive to this day, suggesting the global events from 700 BC era 'didn't exist' is asinine.

  • Fri Dec 05, 2008 7:33 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    "the forelimb could never have flexed from the elbow to lie in a fully load-bearing posture." (Vol 347, p. 67)"

    So, what does that matter? Lungfish and mudskippers have less than this and they still manage to move from pond to pond. 'full load bearing weight' signifies it couldn't walk in a typical locomotion gape, but this doesn't mean it couldn't use them in a pushing/thrusting motion to skirt along the ground.

    "Flop? Slither? Maybe, but not walk; the limbs could not support it AT ALL."

    They perhaps could have supported it in water, after all the buoyancy matters. Who cares, I never said it had to walk to make it from pond to pond, using such limbs would suffice.

  • Fri Dec 05, 2008 4:00 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    Agent, yes, let's be clear. You still contend, as you did back then: "They assert it couldn't walk in the typical locomotion of terrestrial animals, as the limbs couldn't support its weight well. Though it didn't need to 'walk' in the typical sense, it's life persisted around water."

    Notice the wording of your response: "it couldn't support its weight WELL." Coates and Clack, 2 of the world's 3 best experts on Acanthostega, write in Nature: "the forelimb could never have flexed from the elbow to lie in a fully load-bearing posture." (Vol 347, p. 67) "Couldn't support its weight WELL"? That means it did not "walk" or even support its weight IN ANY SENSE on land. Flop? Slither? Maybe, but not walk; the limbs could not support it AT ALL.

    Now, about your comment: "Get this, the 21-24 Dynasties, as you mention, correlated to a date of around 600-800 BC, and this time period you claim didn't exist? Honestly now."

    What's the matter, you haven't had your afternoon coffee yet? I did not claim the period 800-600 BC did not exist; how you can twist that question from what I wrote defies imagination. I know you are smarter than that.

    You cited the Wiki site. I read it. Your Wiki source included Peter James and his book Centuries of Darkness. Peter James claimed that the reason there are no records for Dynasties 21-24 is that they did not exist. Therefore, Manetho was wrong, and the Egyptian timeline should be compressed.
    Eusebius (writing much closer to Manetho and the history in question) stated that four kings of Egypt reigned simultaneously. If these four dynasties (not 21-24) were concurrent, then the traditional timeline should be compressed even further. James and others believe we should reduce the timeline by as much as 600-700 years. When this is done, Egyptian history lines up with the much more reliable Assyrian and Biblical chronologies.

  • Fri Dec 05, 2008 2:56 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    agent, yes, but men who were superintended by God's Holy Spirit, they wrote in their own language and writing style but they were superintnended by God's Holy Spirit so the Word of God would convey the truths that God wants us to know and obey.

  • Fri Dec 05, 2008 1:00 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    Yet you disagree with the PhDs at the Univ of Chicago. How is it that you know more than they do?"

    I don't think they define it or others like it as simply a fish. They assert it couldn't walk in the typical locomotion of terrestrial animals, as the limbs couldn't support its weight well. Though it didn't need to 'walk' in the typical sense, it's life persisted around water.

    Though with it's modified limbs this doesn't mean it couldn't use its limbs like a mudskipper does in slithering and seeking new ponds as others dried up or ran low on food, this is partially what they would have served a purpose for. Such limbs need not be *perfected* for covering mass distances of long durations to be used to move about. They would only be needed to move from pond to pond in such cases.

    "I was repeating the argument of Peter James in his book Centuries of Darkness, which you neglect to mention, is on the Wiki site you cited earlier. Your source, I repeated it, you disagreed. How do you do that?"

    Get this, the 21-24 Dynasties, as you mention, correlated to a date of around 600-800 BC, and this time period you claim didn't exist? Honestly now.

  • Fri Dec 05, 2008 12:38 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    agent,
    "Acanthastega" yeah, yeah, we'll to you it's a fish. A fish with legs, digits, pelvic and pectoral bones using such limbs, lungs and such, but a fish to you."

    It doesn't matter what I think: you asked me to look at the Univ of Chicago site, I did; you asked me about it, and I answered. I never proclaimed myself an expert in evolutionary matters. You do, or at least act like it, tho your background and education are not in biology. Yet you disagree with the PhDs at the Univ of Chicago. How is it that you know more than they do?

    "he argues that the reason there are no records for Dynasties 21-24 is simple: they did not exist;"
    Hmm, but those dynasties (21-24) would have been around at the time of 800-600 BC, and not even Christians don't think this time period didn't happen. Maybe you mistook something?"

    I was repeating the argument of Peter James in his book Centuries of Darkness, which you neglect to mention, is on the Wiki site you cited earlier. Your source, I repeated it, you disagreed. How do you do that?

  • Fri Dec 05, 2008 12:26 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    "Acanthastega" yeah, yeah, we'll to you it's a fish. A fish with legs, digits, pelvic and pectoral bones using such limbs, lungs and such, but a fish to you.

    "he argues that the reason there are no records for Dynasties 21-24 is simple: they did not exist;"

    Hmm, but those dynasties (21-24) would have been around at the time of 800-600 BC, and not even Christians don't think this time period didn't happen. Maybe you mistook something?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-sixth_dynasty_of_Egypt

    anyhoo.

  • Fri Dec 05, 2008 12:00 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    "Who is telling the truth? God or man?"

    Star, I am trying to get this, you invoke an appeal to authority as if that trumps it, but that's a logical fallacy already. Worse yet, you ignore the fact that men, yes men, penned the bible. An inspiration of god penned by men.

  • Fri Dec 05, 2008 11:09 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    Agent,
    Sometimes you crack me up. "Funny, b/c that's not what Britannica says regarding the Egyptian Dynasties and the dates of rulers and records kept. Where does mathetes cite his comments on reduction of 700 years?"

    After all the times you have written off the top of your head, without citing your sources, you would throw that charge at me? You think I'm making this up? Here:
    Peter James, Centuries of Darkness - he argues that the reason there are no records for Dynasties 21-24 is simple: they did not exist; Manetho invented them (he was wrong in a number of places). Also check out Gardiner's Egypt of the Pharaohs and Rohl's A Test of Time. Would you like page numbers with that, sir?

    "mathetes or Britannica, choices, choices, hmmmmmm."
    I like that one too. You were the one who contradicted PhD paleontologists at the Univ of Chicago re:Acanthastega, so I can't give material which contradicts Britannica? They aren't going to cite in their article: they might not sell as many encyclopedia sets.

    Also, I stand by my previous statement: "Egyptian chronology is based on the Sothic cycle (which no one completely understands)"
    You said: "Oh, I think so, it's essentially the same thing as the Julian calendar system, the differences is dating is nominal at best."
    You cited Wiki as you often do: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sothic_cycle

    However, you write as if it were settled, when in fact, the page actually described a number of arguments against using the Sothic cycle since it is still under considerable debate. See, I not only read the full page, I look on the discussion page as well. Anyone reading the whole thing would see that my original statement is an accurate description of the Wiki Sothic cycle page.

  • Fri Dec 05, 2008 10:47 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    gmg, you read my mind, but you must admit he is good at dodging bullets!:)

  • GMG »
    Fri Dec 05, 2008 1:36 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Ifeelfine,

    Maybe you need to go back and re-read your posts. You provided the site on China's history in answer to someone else's question. I went ahead and perused the site and only then did I start posting, by challenging your claims based on the information given at the very site you provided (a site that was supposed to support your claim that China had written historical records pre- and post-flood.

    So you see, I have only ever attempted to address the specific information you provided as your "proof", and you have yet to deal with my answer to your original specific information.

    Boy, trying to get you to deal with a single issue at a time, an issue that you presented, is like pulling teeth. Do you only pursue a single subject as long as you think you have the upper hand? Do you EVER back down when a claim you make is shown to be in error? Shown by way of your own cited source no less. I'm surprised that you aren't claiming that the source I am quoting is not valid....except I guess you wouldn't want to do that with your own source, now would you?

    YOU address the issue and quit running, after all, it was your issue in the first place, so now address the information from that site already!!!

  • Thu Dec 04, 2008 11:48 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Who is your source of truth ifeelfine72, God or man?

  • Thu Dec 04, 2008 10:58 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    ifeelfine72

    God says in His Word that He created man in His image and likeness.

    Genesis 1:27 - "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them."

    Evolution says that man is nothing more than, macroscopically speaking, a mutated ape.

    Is God lying? Or is evolution wrong?

  • Thu Dec 04, 2008 10:50 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    ifeelfine72

    Isaiah 54:9 (King James Version)

    9For this is as the waters of Noah unto me: for as I have sworn that the waters of Noah should no more go over the earth; so have I sworn that I would not be wroth with thee, nor rebuke thee.

    God said that the flood was global. Who is telling the truth? God or man?

  • Thu Dec 04, 2008 10:40 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    ifeelfine, GMG did when he showed you the source you cited to support that view was bogus, so now you need to cite another source that supports your point of view.

  • Thu Dec 04, 2008 10:36 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    ifeelfine72

    >>>GMG: you need to go back and re-read the source then, because it did not say there is no recorded history around that time in China.<<<

    According to the website

    Ancient China Timeline
    http://blue.butler.edu/~jfmcgrat/china/timeline.htm

    the earliest evidence of a writing system as well as the first historical record didn't occur until the Shang Dynasty (1766-1050 BC).

    So we can say that there is no written record of previous dynasties in China.

    Please identify what the record(s) were of the previous dynasties.

  • Thu Dec 04, 2008 8:07 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    agentorange: Star finds that site reputable because it supports her worldview.

  • Thu Dec 04, 2008 8:02 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    GMG: I asked you a question about answering the underlying concerns that history continued while and right after the flood supposedly happened. You have yet to address that specific concern and instead focus on one particular site - address the issue already and stop running.

  • Thu Dec 04, 2008 3:52 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Funny, b/c that's not what Britannica says regarding the Egyptian Dynasties and the dates of rulers and records kept. Where does mathetes cite his comments on reduction of 700 years?


    mathetes or Britannica, choices, choices, hmmmmmm.

    http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/180468/ancient-Egypt/22297/The-5th-dynasty-c-2465-c-2325-bc

    "Egyptian chronology is based on the Sothic cycle (which no one completely understands) "

    Oh, I think so, it's essentially the same thing as the Julian calendar system, the differences is dating is nominal at best.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sothic_cycle

    http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/555068/Sothic-cycle

  • Thu Dec 04, 2008 1:36 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    agentorange

    Thanks for sharing your family's religious beliefs and practices.

    I have prayed for your Aunt's salvation.

  • Thu Dec 04, 2008 1:21 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    agentorange

    Egypt does a flood story where humanity was wiped out with a flood and then repopulated. Here it is:

    Taken from
    Summaries
    http://library.thinkquest.org/29064/summaries/egypt_flood.html

    EGYPT -- FLOOD

    Ra was warned by the Watery Abyss that humans had grown too rebellious, so he took Hathor and ordered her to punish the people.

    Hathor went to earth and slew millions of humans. The streets of the town of Chetenuten began to run like a river with blood because of her horrific endeavour. So much blood drained into the Nile that it overflowed the riverbanks, and the bloody water flooded the land, destroying everything. This water eventually ran into the sea, which overflowed as well. Hathor began drinking this horrible mixture of blood and water.

    Ra was displeased with Hathor's work, as he had only wanted to punish, and not destroy, the human race. So he asked Thoth, the wisest God, for help. He then told the Goddess Sektet to mix together dada, fruit and barley to make beer. The beer was then to be mixed with human blood, in the hopes that it would attract Hathor.

    Ra's servents were then ordered to pour out the mixture on the remaining land near Hathor. The beer became a great sea, and Hathor was drawn to it by the smell of the blood. She drank the beer until she was so intoxicated that she staggered off to sleep, leaving the last few humans behind.

    From those humans, earth was repopulated.

    Ra left the upkeep of earth to Thoth from then on, and he went off to rest on the back of the great cow of heaven. Thoth taught humans how to be civilized.

  • Thu Dec 04, 2008 12:38 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    agentorange, you said "Additionally, we should also note that according to Biblical literalists, the noachian flood would have occurred around some 4000 years ago, which is odd, as it would have occured right during the 5th and 6th Egyptian Dynasties and whiped them out. But there is no indication of it from them. They go on in their historical accounts as if it never occurred, and there is no evidence that massive populations were wiped out as a result."

    mathetes' post on Sat Nov 29 6:53pm gives the best answer to your statement. I will post it here:

    "Unas, last king of the 5th Dynasty, was the first to include writing in his tomb. Typically dated to period mentioned below, but probably not correctly. Egyptian chronology is based on the Sothic cycle (which no one completely understands) and Manetho, an Egypitan priest living in the 3rd century BC. Manetho wrote a history of Egypt best he could, but he made mistakes: he identified 30 separate dynasties, when in fact the last king of one dynasty was the father of the first king of the next dynasty (hardly separate). Further, dynasties ruled concurrently on several occasions, so the entire Egyptian chronology should be shrunk as much as 600-700 years. Thus, Unas and the whole 5th dynasty probably fits best in the 18th century BC, not the 24th or 25th century BC."

  • Thu Dec 04, 2008 3:11 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Hi star

    I spelt it wrong it's wadi not waddi, duh!!!don't know where I got the double d from, my tutor would love that . Anyway, a wadi is the result of flooding in dessert conditions, apart from the final result they give good information about deposition and the kinetic energy and resulting sorting etc..of rocks by the water. Last year I spent some time studying rivers and deposition rates and the resulting sorting in enviromental site, its very interesting.

    Great to hear you are studying this subject. I'd like to suggest that maybe you try and find a local geological society. They are always great fun, and its good rather than just to read about rocks and fossils to go out and actually look at them with like minded people. I'm certain the U S Geological Survey has details of such groups in your area, or you can google them.

    BW

    Steve

  • Thu Dec 04, 2008 1:38 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "does the rest of your family have similar thoughts about God as you do?"

    Some do, others quasi do, or in name sake only as they don't appear to sincerely know what's in the bible to be honestly considered 'Christian' in a any meaningful way let alone follow or attempt to follow the doctrine in a meaningful way. Others do not have a belief or are at the very least do not consider religion and or God significant or meaningful in their everyday lives.

    A few are sincere in their beliefs, but they don't attempt to preach too often or put on a 'holly than thou are' facade. I would liken them to the existing demographics for religion/belief in the USA.

    My parents profess a belief, but nothing enough to attend church let alone read the bible. I am more familiar with it then they are, as demonstrated with my past discussions on it many years ago. I think my dad is more of a Deist in his belief.

    My parents disgust with largely organized religion and contempt for how some always abused its inherit power combined with the fact that they're largely skeptical of supernaturalism makes a deep sincere belief not easily attainable. Either one grows up believing talking snakes are legit, or they don't, and this is paramount to why Christianity and religions in general highly encourage the faith be grinded into the youth before they can think logically and conclude things based on evidence and rational thinking. As the OT says, get em while their young.

    I have some cousins who go to Church at least 2-3 a month, but they were ignorant of many things in the OT such as not eating shellfish, so I don't think they too have REALLY read much of it (like many Christians I would suspect), or at least not much more than the pastor hints at reading. My aunt, the one I mentioned, only recently in the past 2 years has now began to engage in learning about Christianity/religion, and largely I suspect it's b/c she's noticed that as she's gotten older some of her acquaintances have died and so I suspect the fear of death has lead her to enquirer.

  • Thu Dec 04, 2008 1:12 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Star,

    'What's so great about Christianity' Is a fair quality book supporting religion and in particular Christianity. It's focus is on appologetics, namely attempting to answer against the onslaught from the likes of Dawkin's, Hitchen's, Harris, Dennet, etc. It's on the 'New York Times best sellers list' and its author, D'souza, is honestly the only apologetic that from memory has fared reasonably in public debates with said non-believers.

    He's not a voice for literalism though, he advocates a 'traditional Christian view', his words, not mine.

    http://www.dineshdsouza.com/

    I chose the other 2 ID books simply for reviewing their work and I am looking to work with PvM (a poster, like me) and others from Panda's Thumb on critiquing it.

  • Wed Dec 03, 2008 11:44 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    agentorange

    When I was a kid I use to have a 22 caliber rifle. I was a pretty good shot. When I went to a co-ed summer camp in North Carolina (l lived in Miami Fl at the time) we use to do target shooting with a 22 caliber rifle and we messed around with a 12 gauge and 16 gauge shotgun. Well, anyway, after about 8 weeks of camp (the camp went for 12 weeks), the boys competed with the girls on target shooting. I won the competition with the girls and then competed with the boy who won among the boys. We were even in our contest with one another up until the last shot. The stress of winning set in and I got nervous, the rifle became heavy, and I wasn't able to keep a steady aim on my target. Needless to say, my shot was more off from the bulls eye than my competition's so I lost. The prize for winning was several differnt kinds of candy bars. After our competition, the boy said to me, "You did good Pat" and he gave me one of his candy bars. That was nice of him. It made me feel good for him to acknowledge my shooting performance. I felt like we were near equals and that we were members of an exclusive shooting club.

    I have shot a .22 hand gun and also a .35 handgun. The later had more kick to it.

    The shotguns really had some kick to it and it was very loud. I use to like blowing away paint cans with it.

    I don't have any guns now. I just trust God to take care of me.

  • GMG »
    Wed Dec 03, 2008 11:37 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

    believer,

    Sad, but true!

  • Wed Dec 03, 2008 11:19 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    agentorange, does the rest of your family (parents,grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, siblings) have similar thoughts about God as you do?

  • Wed Dec 03, 2008 11:17 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    <<<'What's so great about Christianity'>>>

    Oh dear agentorange, I think you would have done better to have gotten a book written by a person who knows God and His Son the Lord Jesus Christ. What does a non-believer who has never had a personal relationship with Jesus Christ know about God, why we need His son Jesus Christ, and what the benefits (temporal and eternal) are of being a Christian?

  • Wed Dec 03, 2008 10:59 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    steveh20

    "Once again, many thanks for the hard work you put into the answer."

    You are welcomed. I did the best I could. I am really new to this kind of stuff. Didn't start learning about evolution, fossil records, etc until Jan 2008.

  • Wed Dec 03, 2008 10:43 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    steveh20
    >>>One othet thing I would ask, are your predictions due to studying in class etc..or reading particular web sites, which you sometimes give links to?<<<

    Mainly from the websites I have mentioned. Nothing from any class.
    .

  • Wed Dec 03, 2008 10:36 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    steveh20

    >>>Its not quite what I was thinking of as I'm more interested in the sorting of rocks into fine medium and coarse that diffrent speeds and quantities of water bring etc... <<<

    This flood, was it caused by just rain water or was it a result of the breaking up of the ground with water gushing out of the ground and water poring down from the sky at the same time like it was during Noah's flood? The results would be different depending on what caused the flood.



    >>>If I had to pick out two points the first would be that your prediction of such good sorting by flood waters does not correspond with what we find.>>>

    I would not expect the good sorting of animal fossils to be so perfect as 6) suggests.

    My statements are incomplete and do not necessarily represent exactly what I was thinking or that logic would dictate. For example, "6) Land animals would be buried according to their ability to move quickly. Slower ones would be in lower stratas then those that can run swiftly." This is a general statement. There would of course be situations where animals that could run faster would be found with animals that are much slower but most of the faster moving animals would be found in higher strata.


    What is a 'waddi'?

  • Wed Dec 03, 2008 5:13 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Many thanks star, you certainly put in a lot of hard work there.

    Its not quite what I was thinking of as I'm more interested in the sorting of rocks into fine medium and coarse that diffrent speeds and quantities of water bring etc... If I had to pick out two points the first would be that your prediction of such good sorting by flood waters does not correspond with what we find. A good example would be a fosillised waddi which I was surveying last year in the north of England. This waddi was formed by flood waters when that area was a dessert 250 Ma. The flooding and the waddi that is produced is not what geologists call well sorted, rocks of all sizes are jumbled together and good sorting only occurs as the water slows down, with its eneregy decresing, when this occurs larger objects settle first, the same would happen with animals I would there expect to find worms and elephants (as an example). So I think your prediction of such sorting due to a flood would be incorrect, we can observe this in floods today and those in the strata. The second concerns marine fossils in mountains. This is due to the fossils being in rocks that where originally sea floor before continents converged creating an orogeny, a good example is the himalaya. One of the really intereting things is that the vegetation in the area as one moves upwards bears characteristics of when it grew at lower latitudes, i.e when the mountain range was at a lower elevation, fascinating don't you agree.

    One othet thing I would ask, are your predictions due to studying in class etc..or reading particular web sites, which you sometimes give links to?

    Once again, many thanks for the hard work you put into the answer.

    BW

    Steve

  • Wed Dec 03, 2008 3:59 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    gmg, well said, but I've come to believe this about some people, he's got his mind made up so don't confuse him with facts and certainly not God's Will or Word!

  • Wed Dec 03, 2008 2:04 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "I suspect you are the same with the sources I mention. Right?"

    You're honestly think comparing the works of some anonymous 'angelfire.com' or 'evolution-facts' to PloS, Cell, Harvard, Nature, National Geographic is even remotely rational in terms of weighing evidence?

  • Wed Dec 03, 2008 1:54 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Fair enough star, fair enough. I think we could both use a rest on that topic. =)

    My parents live in MN and it was indeed a most restful and relaxing time. Sleep, ahhhh. =) I love visiting my folks and relatives, of course I'll be back. My dad's side, and many of my relatives are avid hunters (gun owners) and fishers and all out love nature. I ended up getting a Glock 17 (a gun) for my personal/home protection. I have a .22, but it doesn't give me the reassurance in case a robber broke in. My dad has tons of guns, as do many of my relatives, sorta just the culture in MN and elsewhere.

    The week prior my aunt and I went into a Christian Book store in Maple Grove (Northwestern Bookstore) and picked up some books. 'What's so great about Christianity', 'The Design Revolution', and 'Intelligent Design 101'. I love to read.

  • Wed Dec 03, 2008 1:46 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    agentorange, go spend some time reading what they have written. They comment on what evolutionists believe and why they disagree. Many quotes are given, some by evolutionists and some by creationists with the source of those quotes cited. I don't agree with everything that website says; I think some of their arguments are weak but I do think that they have better explanations for what we observe in nature for the stuff I have read thus far. I haven't read everything they have written so I can't speak to everything said on that cite. I don't agree with evolution and thus any explanation given by the sources you mentioned carry no weight with me. I suspect you are the same with the sources I mention. Right?

  • Wed Dec 03, 2008 1:37 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    I do not know how long it will take. I will not respond to the topic of evolution with you personally any more until I am ready to discuss or say something about the current issues we have been discussing.

    Since you stopped posting last week I figured you had gone to California to see your parents. Did you have a good time? Are you going to go back for the Christmas holidays? Yes, my thanksgiving was good.

  • Wed Dec 03, 2008 1:32 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    star2, where does this 'evolution facts' site have the facts on evolution? I am wondering why you find it reputable, but not say, Nature, or Nat Geo, or Cell?

  • Wed Dec 03, 2008 1:23 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Any idea on how long you expect this might take? This is so we can mutually agree to move to another topic for the time being. I hope you had a good Thanksgiving, I was away with family which is why I wasn't posting last week.

  • Wed Dec 03, 2008 1:19 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    You will hear no more from me agentorange until I am ready.

  • Wed Dec 03, 2008 1:18 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "http://evolution-facts.org/what%27s_new.htm"

    The irony of the sites name is befuddling, where the facts on evolution on this site?

  • Wed Dec 03, 2008 1:17 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "You will get it when I decide to give it to you"

    Ahhhh, so you know, or want to give the illusion that you know that, but you are going to *Decide* it's right. Ok, but this just begs the question. If you know now, why aren't you deciding to give your objections now?

  • Wed Dec 03, 2008 1:12 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    You will get it when I decide to give it to you.

  • Wed Dec 03, 2008 1:10 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "Yes, I will respond."

    Yup, one of these days.......

    "I have been working on it. But let it be known unto you young man I will not allow you to control me."

    Working on it then. Star, keep in mind it was now over a month ago that the other article lists my response, and still we've yet to hear your objections. How much time do you need?

  • Wed Dec 03, 2008 1:08 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "The stuff you spew out too about evolution as well as the sources you cite is junk also agentorange. "

    Oh, you mean Harvard medical school, HHMI, PLoS, Nature, National Geographic, Cell, etc. Huh? You're a big laugh star, first you think some garbage angelfire.com site is reputable, but this is just as bad.

  • Wed Dec 03, 2008 1:07 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    star2, oh yes, back to the 'no way flood. Oh by the way, you never did rationalize/explain how all the species (again, some 6 million +) fit on the ark, plus their food, water, and disposed of waste for nearly a year.

    Additionally, we should also note that according to Biblical literalists, the noachian flood would have occurred around some 4000 years ago, which is odd, as it would have occured right during the 5th and 6th Egyptian Dynasties and whiped them out. But there is no indication of it from them. They go on in their historical accounts as if it never occurred, and there is no evidence that massive populations were wiped out as a result.

Please help us to monitor our message boards by flagging comments that are unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable.
Contact Us if you have any questions, comments, or concerns.
Comment on this story
ID Password

Don't have a Christian Post ID? Signing up is easy. Click Here

  • icon1
  • icon2
  • icon3
  • icon4
  • icon5
The Christian Post reserves the right to terminate the account of any User who violates our Terms of Use.
Advertisement
Advertisement
CP Shopping
  • Jewelry
  • Health
  • Gifts
  • DVD
  • Coins

Bracelets | Chains | Crosses | Earrings | Gemstone |

Featured contents & Giveaways
Joolwe :
Cross-pendant necklace
Zondervan

Struggling to succeed in the Nashville music scene, talented singer/songwriter Parker James finds the competition fierce even deadly. A young woman's murder, industry corruption, a

Featured Advertiser Links