Georgia edumacation

Should Georgia downplay the validity of evolution?

  • No, Evolution is correct and should be taught as fact.

    Votes: 4 36.4%
  • God's creationism is still a viable alternative to evolution.

    Votes: 6 54.5%
  • Dinosaurs are Jesus Horses!

    Votes: 1 9.1%

  • Total voters
    11

ksocia

CAT ATTACK! Meerowwer!
Joined
Oct 29, 2003
Messages
643
Reaction score
4
Points
0
Some Georgia school officials want to place stickers on their science textbooks stating that evolution is "a theory, not a fact." (Story here)

Anyone think it's a good idea? (I don't).
 
I personally do believe in evolution - I think it makes great sense, and there is great evidence to back it up. However, I don't think it's necessarily wrong to teach it as a theory. But not for the same reason that Georgia officials think so.
I think science should strive to never be closed-minded. If we can't prove something 100%, then it should be a theory. Otherwise there wouldn't be much difference between science and religion.
 
Here's something they don't teach you about the theory of evolution....

Charles Darwin, the one who dreamed up the theory recanted everything he ever said about evolution and became a Christian shortly before he died.
 
Er ppl isint the queston answered in the phrase "theory of evolution" , now to me it dosent matter if darwin was a christian , i believe in science and prrof , and we have all of that to support evolution. I think this crap is just to rub in the Moral values of the Blue states. Evolution is a theory , and the only reason it is that is becaUSE there is no other theory yet , and to say uts proof will be going against one of the biggest organisations (the vatacan) in the world
 
rjgraves said:
Here's something they don't teach you about the theory of evolution....

Charles Darwin, the one who dreamed up the theory recanted everything he ever said about evolution and became a Christian shortly before he died.

It was a lie, but thank you for playing don't believe everything they tell you forum edition :rolleyes:


Reference Library: Encyclopedia

"With Moody's encouragement, Lady Hope's story was printed in the Boston Watchman Examiner. The story spread, and the claims were republished as late as October 1955 in the Reformation Review and in the Monthly Record of the Free Church of Scotland in February 1957. These attempts to fudge Darwin's story had already been exposed for what they were, first by his daughter Henrietta after they had been revived in 1922. 'I was present at his deathbed,' she wrote in the Christian for February 23, 1922. 'Lady Hope was not present during his last illness, or any illness. I believe he never even saw her, but in any case she had no influence over him in any department of thought or belief. He never recanted any of his scientific views, either then or earlier. We think the story of his conversion was fabricated in the U.S.A. . . . The whole story has no foundation whatever.'" (Ellipsis original.)

""At the present day (ca. 1872) the most usual argument for the existence of an intelligent God is drawn from the deep inward conviction and feelings which are experienced by moat persons. But it cannot be doubted that Hindoos, Mahomadans and others might argue in the same manner and with equal force in favor of the existence of one God, or of many Gods, or as with the Buddists of no God...This argument would be a valid one if all men of all races had the same inward conviction of the existence of one God: but we know that this is very far from being the case. Therefore I cannot see that such inward convictions and feelings are of any weight as evidence of what really exists." (p.91)" Charles Robert Darwin

"In his old age Darwin wrote, "I can indeed hardly see how anyone ought to wish Christianity to be true; for if so the plain language of the text seems to show that the men who do not believe, and this would include my Father, Brother and almost all of my friends, will be everlasting punished. And this is a damnable doctrine." This phrase was stricken from publication by his wife, who feared it would offend their religious family and friends. Still, Darwin always stressed that his theory was merely a statement of the obvious and should have no dire effect on religions. He maintained that he was "agnostic" to his death. A few years later, stories circulated that he recanted his theory and loss of faith, but his family stated that these were stories simply were untrue. "
 
Last edited:
Back
Top