Religious Science, Non-Religious Science, 2 different subjects and two different versions. Both not the same thing meaning there is more than one. For there to only be one science both subjects would have to be teaching the exact same thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by mrdevious
Since you aren't worried about this affecting our children I fail to see what your point here is. I was lead to believe your concern was that this is going affect our way of life as a non believer. If that isn't the case then I came into the discussion for the wrong reasons.Quote:
I beg to differ. Your prior response postulates that the creationist museum is spouting the same thing as the churches and therefor makes no difference. The museum is doing more than any church is capable of, they're actually displaying these arguments in pseudo-scientific terms and thus justifying these beliefs at a high level. The churches don't have elaborote "scientific" explanations as to how coal can form in weeks, or why carbon dating for some reason doesn't work. Sure they may espew the same message, but the elaborate intricacy of the message from the museum portrays a considerably more impressive version of these beliefs.
What I'm trying to get across here is that people have always gone to church, and some end up questioning and rejecting the teachings as is there right. But institutions like these veil the superstition in a cloak of pseudo-science, they keep kids from questioning these beliefs became they actually manage to convince them that creationism is a scientific endeavor with plenty of faulty "evidence" to back it up. I think a lot more people would be willing to walk away from this system of thought were they not fed illusionary "science" that tricks them into believing the creationist reasoning is sound.
More the fool you if you seriously don't think they already teach their kids this shit. Plus you should have been this specific from the start.Quote:
It's not my babies I'm worried about, it's theirs. This isn't just religious education anymore, it's a full masters degree in pseudo logic.
I'm not saying it is science to the truest form if at all, but what else shall I refer to it as? If they believe that's Science and refer to it as Science then I'd say it's a Christian version of Science. Regardless if it should or shouldn't be called Science, they still practice this meaning that the two subjects (Rligion and Science) aren't separate.Quote:
I totally disagree, the church and science are quite distinctly separate. Just because some people use faulty reasoning and unscientific interpretations, then call it "science", doesn't make it science.
Right, have fun crying Wolf. I'm off to make a cheese sandwich.
P.s I just read through the thread again, and you said to me that your concern isn't our children it's thiers. But Billionfold quite clearly stated non child believers and child believers. You went on to argue that children don't call BS. I'm sorry but this just gives me more reason not to discuss this with you. If you can't stick to your original debate then why should I even bother?
