Hedshaker
New member
Science is not the same as evolution.
Then explain why, without resorting to some ridiculous world wide conspiracy theory, is Evolution taught in science class?
Science is not the same as evolution.
I don’t know what you mean by “like” physics or chemistry. But evolution is most definitely a scientific discipline.I don't believe whales are descended from land animals.
Evolution is not a scientific discipline like physics or chemistry.
Not all science courses teach evolution.Then explain why, without resorting to some ridiculous world wide conspiracy theory, is Evolution taught in science class?
Evolution is not a scientific discipline. Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Astronomy are scientific disciplines.I don’t know what you mean by “like” physics or chemistry. But evolution is most definitely a scientific discipline.
Sorry about you relapsing in favor of tribal legends over science. I know just how addicting those “feel-good” Biblical fantasies are. If you ever are really serious about using science to see how the physical world works, and what the fossil record shows, whale evolution might be a good place to start.
Not all science courses teach evolution.
Evolution is not a scientific discipline. Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Astronomy are scientific disciplines.
I have no idea what not answering the question would concede. I did attempt to answer the question. My position is that a Christian can study science without studying (or studying and then accepting) evolution. Evolution as a whole stands opposed to God and the Bible.Are you serious? There are many branches of science that do not teach evolution. Why would the theory of electricity mention Evolution for example? Or the theory of gravity?
Your question was:"Then explain why, without resorting to some ridiculous world wide conspiracy theory, is Evolution taught in science class?
Answer the question or concede.
If you were going to study and teach a scientific discipline I don't see how it could be evolution. Evolution is a theory held to by many who learn or teach science. But it is not required to believe evolution is a fact, or even a legitimate theory as a whole, in order to study science.As is the theory of evolution .Explain why it isn't without resorting to some ridiculous world wide conspiracy theory?
Oh, you are quite wrong about that. You know that the majority of the scientific organizations have issued formal statements affirming their support for evolution as a valid part of science. Evolution is a standard part of the biology curriculum at almost every major university in the world. In my personal library I have literally thousands of peer-reviewed papers on evolution that meet the same standards of conformance to scientific methodology as do biology, chemistry, physics, and astronomy. All of the major challenges in court in the last few decades have ruled that evolution is part of science.Evolution is not a scientific discipline. Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Astronomy are scientific disciplines.
I am not saying that people in science do not affirm the theory of evolution. Many do. But that doesn't mean the discipline of their study from where they make their affirmation is the theory of evolution itself.Oh, you are quite wrong about that. You know that the majority of the scientific organizations have issued formal statements affirming their support for evolution as a valid part of science. Evolution is a standard part of the biology curriculum at almost every major university in the world. In my personal library I have literally thousands of peer-reviewed papers on evolution that meet the same standards of conformance to scientific methodology as do biology, chemistry, physics, and astronomy. All of the major challenges in court in the last few decades have ruled that evolution is part of science.
I am gratified that you recognize the 4 fields you itemize as scientific disciplines. I have seen some fascinating studies looking at the biological similarities (within the cells, not fossils) between life forms to see if they show a common ancestry. Astronomy – you realize only the very very closest of the stars are within 10,000 light years of earth? 99.99% of what astronomers can see, and base their studies on, is light that has been in transit for millions, or even billions of years. Physics – you know that devout Christian named Lord Kelvin – famed for his work on understanding thermodynamics? To the end of his life he defended, based on thermodynamics, the fact that the earth was at a minimum tens of millions of years old. So I guess even if you have this strange anti-whale quirk, at least you are not one of those goofy YECers.
I have no idea what not answering the question would concede. I did attempt to answer the question. My position is that a Christian can study science without studying (or studying and then accepting) evolution. Evolution as a whole stands opposed to God and the Bible.
If you were going to study and teach a scientific discipline I don't see how it could be evolution. Evolution is a theory held to by many who learn or teach science. But it is not required to believe evolution is a fact, or even a legitimate theory as a whole, in order to study science.
When I was in college there were courses in Physics and Chemistry, but I don't think Evolution was even a course I could take.
I don't, except that evolution is a widely held belief of many.So how do you explain Christian scientists who fully accept the evidence for the theory of evolution?
Evolution can be seen through many lenses, but it is most often seen through the lens of science.Evolution is a branch of science, as is the theory of gravity or the theory electricity. You are free to take one with out the other . It's still science.
Evolution can be seen through many lenses, but it is most often seen through the lens of science.
The theory of evolution is a theory of science as far as I can tell. But that doesn't make evolution a discipline (Consider Geology, Biology, Theology) or a scientific discipline (add Chemistry, Physics, Astronomy) etc.... Do you understand my position now? Now the question about if it is science becomes or is a question about if believing science in terms of methodology we should also believe evolution. Also, my understanding is that evolution as an idea (at least of some sort) existed before it existed as a theory of science.All you need to do Untellectual is show us why the theory of evolution isn't science,
without resorting to some ridiculous world wide conspiracy theory, and we can then shut up all get on out knees and get on with some serious worship.
we're not holding our breath though.
People put their faith in science. But the scientific methodology, though we can trust it, is much different from trusting God! And also the methodology is different from the theories science claims as its own. As for the theory of evolution I believe there may be evolution on a small scale, called micro evolution. But I don't believe macro evolution has ever occurred. I believe that believing in macro evolution is believing in a false belief.So you admit it is science? Finally!
Thank you!!!!
Nature, Barbie, Nature.
That's Right, Evolutionists Believe that "Nature" is What Formed Living Organisms Out of Inorganic Materials.