Evolution is not "biased". (note: if you disagree, then explain the bias, do not merely assert it)
Yes it is biased. It's a theory that is assumed true with evidence being gathered to support it. Scientists don't want anything but their own arrogance to be proven true. Do you actually think they would try to find any evidence that goes against it?
You are mistaken. Theories are single collective explanations for an observed phenomenon. They are not "two viewpoints". Perhaps you should consider that your problems with evolution are with your own understanding of both it and of science in general and not an actual fault with the theory itself.
Your right they are single collective explanations, but those explanations only go to prove the theory and do not attempt to disprove it. When someone is trying to prove something the sure as heck don't include something that doesn't fit, and the stuff that doesn't fit is molded until it does or simply thrown out as unrelated.
Scientists have one arrogant goal. Prove that mankind is in control and has an answer for everything. I have a brother-in-law who worked for a major scientific research laboratory near Chicago. He told me that the ultimate goal of the company was to prove the big-bang theory. He said that any research that could be used as evidence was accepted and there was no attempt to disprove or test against the evidence. This is not science, this is molding evidence to prove a theory that is already assumed to be true.
Yeah right! Teach children theories that are assumed true with evidence that has only been gathered to support it. My kids aren't being taught that a butterfly has evolved due to toxic chemicals, deforestation or some other man-made end, they are being taught that they come from apes. Evolution is religion masquarading as science and being forced upon us.
Yeah. I remember gravity being taught as fact. And the structure and nature of the atom, too. We need disclaimers on physics and chemistry textbooks stating that the basis behind gravity and atomics are both theories, not facts, and should be carefully considered with an open mind.
And the theory that the earth was flat was taught as fact.
So we should censor science because observed reality happens to contradict someone's religion? Sounds like a bunch of PC bullshit to me.
Observed reality? You were there to witness evolution? LOL!
The same could be said about evolution, if not more so, because it's allowed to be taught in schools. Keep your biased theories to yourself.
I wish my children in public school had a choice to learn it or not. What's worse is that evolution is being taught to my children as fact, not theory. If I'm not mistaken, theories have two viewpoints with neither one being forced upon us.
With all this recent discussion on ID and evolution, I took the opportunity to review my 4th grade daughters science text book. It had an entire section devoted to evolution, and nowhere did it say that it was just a theory or offer a single opposing viewpoint. I also wonder why my child would get tested on evolution when it's only a theory. Just because a bunch of scientists (most of whom don't believe in ID) except the evidence doesn't make it any more than the theory it is.
I understand your point about ID not being science and not belonging in a science cirriculum. My beef is that they teach way to much science as fact. My daughter doesn't come home from school with a study sheet that says test theories, it says test facts. I don't believe that theories have any place is the science cirriculum of a fourth grader. She went through an entire unit on evolution and it was taught and tested as if it was fact. There are plenty of science topics that can be taught in public schools without including theories that go against some beliefs. Leave theoritical science topics at the college level where they belong, and allow classes that look at all possibilities.
There are as many scientists that will disagree with the evidence that supports evolution as those that agree with it, therfore, it will always be theory. All the circumstantial evidence in the world can't prove it. Either teach both evolution and ID in school or leave both out. I would rather they both be left out and left to be taught by parents.
Ah yes, human arrogance. It takes a serious amount of it to believe that you can explain and have control over everything. I can admit that what I believe is based on faith and should not be taught in schools. Scientists, and obviously you, cannot because they think they have a factual explanation for everything. I hope for your sake that you change your mind some day.
And these are proven to be related to evolution how? By observation you say? Observation is still biased.
Here's an examples of flawed observation:
A cave in Springfiled Missouri has tour guides that would have you believe that everying in that cave took millions of years to form. In that cave is a sewer pipe that was accidentaly drilled through the cave in the 1950's. That pipe is covered with an inch thick layer of the same material that everything else in the cave is made out of. Millions of year huh, but that's what scientists would have you believe. Now that's observation.
The Grand Canyon has anomolies that go against it's believed orientation as well and those get swept under the rug to suit scientists.
Bottom line is that it CAN'T and will NEVER be fact until someone invents a time machine to got into the past(which will never happen) or God himself speaks from the heavens. Thank you for playing.
And how do they know that their so called evidence is even related to evolution? If you can't make it happen, it will never be more than a bunch of scientists/thologists believing in something they can't prove. Hmmm, sounds like acting on belief in the absence of evidence to me. Parts of science are just as much a religion as any other, and that's the garbage I don't want being taught as fact. You can teach kids about biology, chemistry, astronomy, etc. as much as you want, but keep both evolution and ID out of it. Don't except one as fact simply because scientists think they have some evidence that they believe(based on faith)is realted.
The evidence for evolution is no more than my point 4. They just make it fit what they believe is true. There is still no, nor will there ever be, proof for it, and thus it should be treated as the theory it is. Many can say the same for evidence leading to ID. Somewhere along the way theology got mixed with real science. Real science is putting two things into a test tube and making it happen. Science is not examining evidence for something that can never be tested and excepting it as fact. It's as much based on faith as being a Christian.
Between evolution and ID, NO. Research will never ever prove evolution knowmader how much science wants it to. My problem is that they teach it in schools like it's fact. It will NEVER EVER be fact and thus should not be taught as such.
Scientific method goes more like this.
1. Observation
2. Hypothesis
3. Experiment
4. Mold results to meet hypothesis
5. Publish paper
Too much science is considered fact. One week the t-rex is a predator and the next he's a scavenger. Nieither evolution nor ID should be taught. They are both based on theory and faith.
Slashdot Mirror
Evolution is not "biased". (note: if you disagree, then explain the bias, do not merely assert it) Yes it is biased. It's a theory that is assumed true with evidence being gathered to support it. Scientists don't want anything but their own arrogance to be proven true. Do you actually think they would try to find any evidence that goes against it? You are mistaken. Theories are single collective explanations for an observed phenomenon. They are not "two viewpoints". Perhaps you should consider that your problems with evolution are with your own understanding of both it and of science in general and not an actual fault with the theory itself. Your right they are single collective explanations, but those explanations only go to prove the theory and do not attempt to disprove it. When someone is trying to prove something the sure as heck don't include something that doesn't fit, and the stuff that doesn't fit is molded until it does or simply thrown out as unrelated. Scientists have one arrogant goal. Prove that mankind is in control and has an answer for everything. I have a brother-in-law who worked for a major scientific research laboratory near Chicago. He told me that the ultimate goal of the company was to prove the big-bang theory. He said that any research that could be used as evidence was accepted and there was no attempt to disprove or test against the evidence. This is not science, this is molding evidence to prove a theory that is already assumed to be true.
Yeah right! Teach children theories that are assumed true with evidence that has only been gathered to support it. My kids aren't being taught that a butterfly has evolved due to toxic chemicals, deforestation or some other man-made end, they are being taught that they come from apes. Evolution is religion masquarading as science and being forced upon us.
And the theory that the earth was flat was taught as fact.
So we should censor science because observed reality happens to contradict someone's religion? Sounds like a bunch of PC bullshit to me.
Observed reality? You were there to witness evolution? LOL!
The same could be said about evolution, if not more so, because it's allowed to be taught in schools. Keep your biased theories to yourself. I wish my children in public school had a choice to learn it or not. What's worse is that evolution is being taught to my children as fact, not theory. If I'm not mistaken, theories have two viewpoints with neither one being forced upon us. With all this recent discussion on ID and evolution, I took the opportunity to review my 4th grade daughters science text book. It had an entire section devoted to evolution, and nowhere did it say that it was just a theory or offer a single opposing viewpoint. I also wonder why my child would get tested on evolution when it's only a theory. Just because a bunch of scientists (most of whom don't believe in ID) except the evidence doesn't make it any more than the theory it is.
I understand your point about ID not being science and not belonging in a science cirriculum. My beef is that they teach way to much science as fact. My daughter doesn't come home from school with a study sheet that says test theories, it says test facts. I don't believe that theories have any place is the science cirriculum of a fourth grader. She went through an entire unit on evolution and it was taught and tested as if it was fact. There are plenty of science topics that can be taught in public schools without including theories that go against some beliefs. Leave theoritical science topics at the college level where they belong, and allow classes that look at all possibilities.
There are as many scientists that will disagree with the evidence that supports evolution as those that agree with it, therfore, it will always be theory. All the circumstantial evidence in the world can't prove it. Either teach both evolution and ID in school or leave both out. I would rather they both be left out and left to be taught by parents.
Ah yes, human arrogance. It takes a serious amount of it to believe that you can explain and have control over everything. I can admit that what I believe is based on faith and should not be taught in schools. Scientists, and obviously you, cannot because they think they have a factual explanation for everything. I hope for your sake that you change your mind some day.
And these are proven to be related to evolution how? By observation you say? Observation is still biased. Here's an examples of flawed observation: A cave in Springfiled Missouri has tour guides that would have you believe that everying in that cave took millions of years to form. In that cave is a sewer pipe that was accidentaly drilled through the cave in the 1950's. That pipe is covered with an inch thick layer of the same material that everything else in the cave is made out of. Millions of year huh, but that's what scientists would have you believe. Now that's observation. The Grand Canyon has anomolies that go against it's believed orientation as well and those get swept under the rug to suit scientists. Bottom line is that it CAN'T and will NEVER be fact until someone invents a time machine to got into the past(which will never happen) or God himself speaks from the heavens. Thank you for playing.
And how do they know that their so called evidence is even related to evolution? If you can't make it happen, it will never be more than a bunch of scientists/thologists believing in something they can't prove. Hmmm, sounds like acting on belief in the absence of evidence to me. Parts of science are just as much a religion as any other, and that's the garbage I don't want being taught as fact. You can teach kids about biology, chemistry, astronomy, etc. as much as you want, but keep both evolution and ID out of it. Don't except one as fact simply because scientists think they have some evidence that they believe(based on faith)is realted.
The evidence for evolution is no more than my point 4. They just make it fit what they believe is true. There is still no, nor will there ever be, proof for it, and thus it should be treated as the theory it is. Many can say the same for evidence leading to ID. Somewhere along the way theology got mixed with real science. Real science is putting two things into a test tube and making it happen. Science is not examining evidence for something that can never be tested and excepting it as fact. It's as much based on faith as being a Christian.
Between evolution and ID, NO. Research will never ever prove evolution knowmader how much science wants it to. My problem is that they teach it in schools like it's fact. It will NEVER EVER be fact and thus should not be taught as such.
The fact that people disagree only proves that the truth will NEVER be know. It does not get you closer to the truth.
Scientific method goes more like this. 1. Observation 2. Hypothesis 3. Experiment 4. Mold results to meet hypothesis 5. Publish paper Too much science is considered fact. One week the t-rex is a predator and the next he's a scavenger. Nieither evolution nor ID should be taught. They are both based on theory and faith.