Sentences with phrase «over creationism»

and in what ways are the current debates over creationism / evolution, or (non)- CAGW not meeting this standard and being hindered accordingly»

Further, what do you even define as an «orderly debate,» why are «orderly debates» as you would define them necessary to thresh out the truth and validity in a scientific theory, and in what ways are the current debates over creationism / evolution, or (non)- CAGW not meeting this standard and being hindered accordingly?

Jerald McClenahan thinks that all this debate over creationism versus evolution is a shameful distraction from the real issues, those pertaining to morals.

The fuss over creationism seems mighty unimportant, for instance, when you stop to consider what a blasphemous decreation we're engaged in.

Provide any credible, reproducible, verifiable evidence for creationism or so - called intelligent design (which is nothing but warmed over creationism to feed to the ignorant).

The article is about Mr. Nye's concerns over Creationism holding us back, scientifically speaking.

When one looks at the myths of surrounding cultures, in fact, one senses that the current debate over creationism would have seemed very strange, if not unintelligible, to the writers and readers of Genesis.

Not exact matches

@Topher It seems that before Ken Ham started his own project over there at AIG, he worked for the Insti / tute for Creation Research, which basically does the same thing as the Discovery Insti / tute — namely, try to create a «sciencey» veneer for Young Earth Creationism.

Creationism — totally debunked over and over Testimonies of delusional people — totally worthless over and over

When Muslims become 80 % of the population, try and push creationism and other myths into our science classes, force their god on our currency, take over our government as you Christians do then they'll be in the bulls eye.

Recent debates in the pages of First Thingsand other conservative journals over Darwin's theory of evolution and creationism reveal the degree to which Catholics seem stuck in the trees for want of seeing the forest, the lopsided degree to which the Church gives assent to philosophy without deeply exploring the particular science it considers a threat, (this journal, it goes without saying, excepted).

«I know there are bitter divisions over evolution and creationism» No division, just fact and nonsense.

All these parents who insist on teaching «creationism» to their kids as «science», while downplaying (or completely / hiding denying) the tangible bona fide evidence of evolution... I sometimes have to wonder why they don't simply feed lead paint to their kids and get it over with.

That's why creationism was discarded as a scientific explanation over a hundred years ago.

Creationism is a failed concept because if taken to its logical conclusion it gives Man dominion over God.

Creationism isn't in need of testing, it has been thoroughly investigated and dismissed over a hundred years ago.

I believe in evolution but I must say that I would believe in the Christian form of creationism over the pastafarian version of it.

Creationism should be indicted for the millions if not billions of lives it has destroyed over the millennial, the oppression of women, torture of millions during the Inquisition and the keeping of slaves.

Most of these self - proclaimed scientists have no idea what creationism stands for and are very adept at knocking over a straw man which exists ony in their own mind.

The vicious fight we're seeing right now over evolution may seem like a resurgence of creationism, but it's a last gasp.

Much modern intellectual debate, particularly within the popular arena, centers on disputes between religion and science over such seminal issues as creationism versus evolutionary theory, or theological explanations of the origin of the universe versus the «big - bang theory» of the new cosmology.

Schools should also pay more attention to the philosophical issues raised by the controversy over creation and evolution — although attentiveness should not mean sneaking in sectarian teaching of religion under the subterfuge of «scientific creationism.»

I know there are bitter divisions over evolution and creationism, for example.

I'm sorry, but I couldn't force myself to believe in creationism, or that gay people don't deserve to be treated fairly, even if I hit myself over the head with a bat, repeatedly.

Of course there are many Religious Right advocates that do not accept historic or scientific facts and believe in Creationism over proven Evolution, believe the earth is 5000 years old instead of Billions reguardless of the fossil and rock record.

This is why true religious adherents are so singularly closed minded, and why the bad ideas fostered by religious thinking — like creationism — repeat themselves over the course of centuries.

It's just turned rancid and hardened to rock over the 2000 - 10000 years mandated by creationism....

Almost 50 % of people believe in creationism over evolution.

«Discussing American science literacy without mentioning evolution is intellectual malpractice» that «downplays the controversy» over teaching evolution in schools, says Joshua Rosenau of the National Center for Science Education, a nonprofit that has fought to keep creationism out of the science classroom.

Sadly, the debate today is not about how to create the best courses that reflect the wonders and excitement of modern biology but rather over whether to teach creationism.

And the question of how science on the fringe should be dealt with remains open: some observers say that Meldrum, who has been lambasted by colleagues and passed over for promotion twice, should just be left alone to do his thing; others counter that in this era of creationism, global warming denial, and widespread antiscience sentiment and scientific illiteracy, it is particularly imperative that bad science be soundly scrutinized and exposed.

Research Paper Creationism Versus Evolutionism and over other 27,000 free term papers, essays and research papers examples are available on the website!

Saying that he does not want his courtroom to become a «three - ring circus,» the federal judge presiding over Louisiana's creationism case has limited the number of lawyers he will allow to participate in the July 26 trial.

However, one might well ask: What about the heated disagreements over how to teach reading and math, American history, science (evolution or creationism?)

Debates over whether public schools should teach creationism or Darwinian evolution are also fundamentally moral.

As cataloged in the Public Schooling Battle Map, government schools have forced parents into conflict over issues like freedom of expression, religion, morality, creationism, evolution, multiculturalism, sexuality, and numerous other issues in hundreds of reported cases in recent years.

I also imgaine that these right wingers (neo cons I believe they are known as) are also very religious in nature (or appear to be) and they carry a lot of power in the USA and hence considering the evolution vs creationism debate that is raging over there at the moment getting action on climate change seems to be almost impossible in the current or by a future republican administration.

I especially appreciated his scathing criticism of Creationism, and have regarded him as a careful sceptic, so it was with some bemusement that I watched his commentary on climate change unfold over the years, even taking into account his vested interests.

OTOH when it comes to pseudo-Science, i.e. the use of «sciency sounding» terms and phrases to pursue a religious / social / ideological agenda, political ideology seems (to me) to make a big difference: religious types spout creationism (including «intelligent» design) or «divine providence», socialists spout environmentalism (including «global warming»), «conservatives» seem to usually resort to mis - understood, or at least mis - applied engineering formulas, and libertarians are all over the map.

There are many public intellectual debates occurring over scientific and skeptical issues — the place of creationism vs evolution in public science classes, the including of alternative medicine in academic curricula, the validity of debate on global warming, etc..