Science Text Attempts to Reconcile Religion and Science

terrymaster69 writes "The New York Times reports that the National Academy of Sciences has just published their third book outlining guidelines for the teaching of evolution. 'But this volume is unusual, people who worked on it say, because it is intended specifically for the lay public and because it devotes much of its space to explaining the differences between science and religion, and asserting that acceptance of evolution does not require abandoning belief in God.'"

Comments

evolution doesn't require abandoning belief in God

[nagora]

But the ability to think does.

The real world doesn't need religion...

[nih]

The real world doesn't need religion in order to function, never has, never will.

Re:Sellouts

[Hognoxious]

And millions of flies eat shit. Your point was what, remind me?

Re:How vs. Why

[wirehead_rick]

I don't believe in a metaphysical god that can intervene, but I do believe in Christian values and morality

Fuck You Asshole.

I am so sick and tired of Christians claiming "ownership" of morality. Here's a news bulletin: CHRISTIANS DID NOT INVENT MORALITY.

I don't suppose it is possible for you to understand that people have feelings and understand compassion without having any idea of who or what a christian god is. We have archeological as well as modern examples of thousands of societies who have had no exposure to a christian religion who seemed to function just fine. Do you suppose these societies exist(ed) as raping murderous folk? How long do you really believe a society could last with a populace with such values?

What I find humerous is that you seem to think religion is the only thing holding you back from killing and raping. Personally I'd recommend you get some physological help right away. Most normal people don't need a mental restraint to understand how to behave in society. They simply inherently know because being a good member of society is inherently in our nature and (speaking of evolution) in our best interest for propogation of our genes.

You're a Fucking Christian Moron and thinking like yours lead down the slippery slope to crazy shit like flying airplanes into buildings.

Re:Trying to bring a god in classroom

[metlin]

If public education makes no mention of God, the students take it upon themselves to do so, typically in the context of "no, God did it." By proactively addressing the relationship between religion (God) and science without making an opinionated statement on the matter, science teachers can disarm a lot of anti-science arguments, thus preventing disruptions in the classroom.

Why?

It is none of science's business - by obviously bringing religion into science, your wife is one of the culprits responsible for fostering thoughts on god and religion. And what's this whole thing about not making an opinionated statement on the matter? Is your wife a science teacher or a religious nutjob proselytizing to her students?

My wife teaches science in public schools, by the way. She takes 15-20 minutes early in the school year to address why religion and science don't have to be at odds, and why students don't need to jump in with comments about God every chance they get. It makes a huge difference in how these kids behave, and even in how they accept the material presented.

Yes they do. Because religion has been responsible for discouraging and killing scientific thought and scientists from days gone by until this day. Christianity more than most, but all religions are equally culpable.

Way to go.

She's also a devout Southern Baptist. So much for stereotypes, huh?

Hah. That explains a lot more. Religious nut indeed.

Re:Orthogonal concepts

[Anonymous Coward]

bullshit, I wasted my time reading that page and it said nothing meaningful about the "why"