Teaching Intelligent Design

[AtlanticBlue99]

1) hydronium and hydroxide in self-induced ionization of 2 water molecules is extremely rare and theory at best

2) polarity doesnt mean conduct electricity- it just "acts" as an ion by setting protons on one side of the molecule (classic water example of HOH) on about a 35 degree apart....

3) now what are the odds (statistically now) that 2 bullets shot form 100 feet away would hit each other? it is not naturally possible. the bullets must be guided, just as the creation process must have been guided by a creator

4) an act of a "creator". it is statistically impossible for spontaneous production of any sort.

sooo. basically- you are about as wrong as fat filippino in a tight white thong.

 

[lemon]

Re: RE: Teaching Intelligent Design

1) hydronium and hydroxide in self-induced ionization of 2 water molecules is extremely rare and theory at best

lemon> well, it was just to prove a point there buddy (the law of conservation of mass).. get off my ass, i only been thru chemy once, and ill never go back.. damn

2) polarity doesnt mean conduct electricity- it just "acts" as an ion by setting protons on one side of the molecule and electrons on the other (classic water example of HOH)

lemon> you put positives on one side, and negatives on the other, you get a magnetic affect, which can conduct electricity, if im not mistaken

3) an act of a "creator". it is statistically impossible for spontaneous production of any sort.

lemon>why not? your computer can fry out, and cause a fire... thats spontaneous, cuz one day the part that would cause the fire could be perfectly fine one day, and be in the perfect condition to cause the fire the next day... heck it could happen as soon as you reply... :dunno thats why they call it spontaneous, cuz they cant predict when it will happen...

sooo. basically- you are about as wrong as fat filippino in a tight white thong.

:barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf

 

[AtlanticBlue99]

now back on topic...

who htinks that teachers would NOT abuse the teaching of "ID" and carry out their own religious agendas in class on the students?

i think it is impossible to fairly teach ID in the classes of the public school system.. whatcha think?

 

[AtlanticBlue99]

Re: RE: Teaching Intelligent Design

1) hydronium and hydroxide in self-induced ionization of 2 water molecules is extremely rare and theory at best

lemon> well, it was just to prove a point there buddy (the law of conservation of mass).. get off my ass, i only been thru chemy once, and ill never go back.. damn

2) polarity doesnt mean conduct electricity- it just "acts" as an ion by setting protons on one side of the molecule and electrons on the other (classic water example of HOH)

lemon> you put positives on one side, and negatives on the other, you get a magnetic affect, which can conduct electricity, if im not mistaken

3) an act of a "creator". it is statistically impossible for spontaneous production of any sort.

lemon>why not? your computer can fry out, and cause a fire... thats spontaneous, cuz one day the part that would cause the fire could be perfectly fine one day, and be in the perfect condition to cause the fire the next day... heck it could happen as soon as you reply... :dunno thats why they call it spontaneous, cuz they cant predict when it will happen...

sooo. basically- you are about as wrong as fat filippino in a tight white thong.

:barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf

and negatives (electrons) dont go on one side- they are in the electron cloud. and protons are in the nucleus.. but what happens is positively charged ions such as H+ and H+ assemble about 35 degrees apart form each other on the same side of the -2 charged O ion.

looks like this:

.............................O-2
..........................H+..H+

sorry, but it would irritate me if i didnt clarify.

and your example of a computer frying is poor and false:

1st off, it isnt spontaneous. someBODY created an electrical current too strong for your computer to handle- overload... it isnt spontaneous bro

 

[lemon]

Re: RE: Teaching Intelligent Design

1) hydronium and hydroxide in self-induced ionization of 2 water molecules is extremely rare and theory at best

lemon> well, it was just to prove a point there buddy (the law of conservation of mass).. get off my ass, i only been thru chemy once, and ill never go back.. damn

2) polarity doesnt mean conduct electricity- it just "acts" as an ion by setting protons on one side of the molecule and electrons on the other (classic water example of HOH)

lemon> you put positives on one side, and negatives on the other, you get a magnetic affect, which can conduct electricity, if im not mistaken

3) an act of a "creator". it is statistically impossible for spontaneous production of any sort.

lemon>why not? your computer can fry out, and cause a fire... thats spontaneous, cuz one day the part that would cause the fire could be perfectly fine one day, and be in the perfect condition to cause the fire the next day... heck it could happen as soon as you reply... :dunno thats why they call it spontaneous, cuz they cant predict when it will happen...

sooo. basically- you are about as wrong as fat filippino in a tight white thong.

:barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf :barf

and negatives (electrons) dont go on one side- they are in the electron cloud. and protons are in the nucleus.. but what happens is positively charged ions such as H+ and H+ assemble about 35 degrees apart form each other on the same side of the -2 charged O ion.

looks like this:

.............................O-2
..........................H+..H+

sorry, but it would irritate me if i didnt clarify.

and your example of a computer frying is poor and false:

1st off, it isnt spontaneous. someBODY created an electrical current too strong for your computer to handle- overload... it isnt spontaneous bro

what does spontaneous mean then? from what i understand, it = not expected

 

[AtlanticBlue99]

spontaneous means:
spon·ta·ne·ous, adj.

1. Happening or arising without apparent external cause; self-generated.
2. Arising from a natural inclination or impulse and not from external incitement or constraint.


so spontaneous production basically means that nothing began something. which is theoretically impossible.

 

[lemon]

Re: RE: Teaching Intelligent Design

spontaneous means:
spon·ta·ne·ous, adj.

1. Happening or arising without apparent external cause; self-generated.

>when something has properties, it interacts with the environment, just based on its properties, no modifications or poking needed...

2. Arising from a natural inclination or impulse and not from external incitement or constraint.

>when something has properties, it interacts with its environment, just based on its properties, no modifications or poking needed...


so spontaneous production basically means that nothing began something. which is theoretically impossible.

who said anything was made from nothing.. unless you take for literal what some teachings say, ie: genesis: god creates the world out of a void...

i was merely using the law of conservation of mass(which is accepted by all science to be true)to show that the universe always existed....just different from what we know it to be from today

 

[AtlanticBlue99]

why are you even trying. are you insane?!?!

you were advocating the big bang on the first page, now you are using my point to make yourself seem right.

:wtf

 

[artisan00]

wow, im really late in this thread, but might as well jump in - -

one thing i just wanted to make more clear, is that atlantic was right about electricity. polarity has nothing (directly) to do with current. having a positive charge and negative charge does not create magnetic 'effects' either. it creates an electric field. (not = current)
what does create magnetic fields, is CHANGING electirc fields, and vice versa. tahts how a generator works (changing magnetic fields creating an electric field, which in a conductor like copper, induces a current.

i may have moxed that up a bit, but atlantic can back me up there (i hope)

as far as something from nothing? well, its a concept, true. its a pretty valid one at that as well - based on the world we live in. but, the laws of physics are all properties of the universe itself. you have no way to prove if those laws are valid outside of this univer (not saying by what), it is not necessarily true to say that the rules we observe in this world were imposed on that action.
simple example - thought experiment - take a plastic jar. put stuff in jar, whataver you want. seal the jar (talking about matter in a simple sense here, to keep the example basic). that matter is not able to leave the jar, and nothing can go in the jar. that system is closed. the 'people' inside the jar would live thier lives every day, thinking that they 'know' that nothing can be created or destroyed completely. little do they know that i could open the jar, and dump in more shit on a whim. see my point? I, as the person who closed the jar, am not bound by the rules i imposed on my little jar world. in the same way, the process of teh begining of a universe cannot be assumed to be bound to the rules in the universe itself.

someone mentioned that the whole dating thing was easily disprovable. also not 100% right - the reason is that they were not saying anything about the stuff that happened in between 15Billion years ago and now.. just stuff that happened AT 15billion years ago. they are saying that if you look at somethig that hapened at the begining, right now, it will look as if it is 15billion years old. howeever 1 year from now, it will look 15billion plus 1. the reason i can say that is becasue for the most part the expansion is a LOT slower than it was in the begining. meaning that now it can be assumed linear in our perspective. and on the same line of reasoning. 1 year ago will not look like 500 days (in the example that OUZ presented) becasue of the same logic. 1 year ago, time was not much differient than it is now (*as far as time dilation is concernerd). so it will look fine.


whew. time to go. ill be back...

 

[AtlanticBlue99]

thanks a lot art- it felt like i was the only one who understood the points i made b/c i had to repeat them a few times. and you are exactly correct on the generator thing...

and the time perception thing as well...

but no matter what you believe in the creation of the universe.. religion must stay out of public schools. i feel it is currently impossible for teachers to not convert teaching of "id" into a faith supporter to create their own religious propagandas. hell- teachers at ym school use their powers to try and influence our developing political beliefs. it is perfectly fine for a teacher to say w/e he or she wants when "off the clock" or official school hours are over, but when conducting class- religion needs to be an internal belief.

 

[Blackwater_GT]

I look in my childs eyes and see a gift from heaven.
I look up at the sky at night and see God.


No I dont think schools should teach creatinism, But you can have students and teachers discuss spirituality cant you? Is it so wrong for someone to stand up for what they believe in.

I like thinking positive it's very healthy. Praying helps me stay on the positive side. Some people think that positive thinking and healthy behavior makes you feel better and gives you more energy.

As far as the ID thing in schools. Maybe a seletive course in High school or College. I think the concept is to complicated for the average person to comprehend anyway.

 

[AtlanticBlue99]

it should be an optional college course IMO, because im in high school (sophomore) and understand it only becasue of prior sciences i have taken. i also believe the average person cannot comprehend the sciences involved in validation of creationism so should not take the course.

i, as well as many of my friends, am religious and a faith is truly healthy. if the odds arent in your favor, faith can carry you on to the next day to try again. every day is a new day.

but

faith should not be discussed during regular school hours between teachers and students- it is unnaceptable. now before or after school when a student chooses to be there, not is forced to be, discussion should carry on freely about whatever subject a speaker/listener chooses. if they dont like it, they can leave...

 

[Blackwater_GT]

I understand completely about not wanting a teacher to teach a student about something they have no qualifications to todo. Thats why they should have trained Theoligins in school. I can rember many times when I was in the service on ships and out in op areas we had priests Rabbis Clerics, Pators that would walk among the servicemen and women and administer to there own and yes sometmes even witness to the unbelieving. This is way it should be at schools also because some schools are like war zones.

 

[OUZBnd]

Re: RE: Teaching Intelligent Design

it should be an optional college course IMO, because im in high school (sophomore) and understand it only becasue of prior sciences i have taken. i also believe the average person cannot comprehend the sciences involved in validation of creationism so should not take the course.

i, as well as many of my friends, am religious and a faith is truly healthy. if the odds arent in your favor, faith can carry you on to the next day to try again. every day is a new day.

but

faith should not be discussed during regular school hours between teachers and students- it is unnaceptable. now before or after school when a student chooses to be there, not is forced to be, discussion should carry on freely about whatever subject a speaker/listener chooses. if they dont like it, they can leave...

Definitely a good prospective class for college, then again, you can teach ANYTHING in college, and most likely a class of this sort already exists if you go to a decent size school. And man, you are only a soph. in HS? You come across as a really intelligent guy, especially for your age (thats a compliment).

 

[AtlanticBlue99]

thanks kevin- got my respect bro, yep a soph in hs- 16 back in november. 1st love= family friends.. 2nd = mustangs. im glad i stumbled upon MF and got transferred over here and then to MM.com too so i can be a part of the growing community. its good to chat with those who are smarter than avg. b/c avg/ talk gets boring sometimes. usually, i like to have a carefree attitude and i tend to let a lot of things slide personally. im one of those people who (when motivated) can excel. but i am also a die hard for respect being earned, not given. that usually gets me in trouble with authority figures at school, but hs is warmup for college.

but most of all, i like speed :rock anything with wheels and speed, or on water too.cor snow. extreme stuff.

we need more of these threads with great, thoughtful, and intelligent debates IMO.

 

[lemon]

intelligent design can be taught in only one manner of fashion: steps

1) A design must always be appealing or no one will want to design it.

2) To make your design intelligently, you must first have intelligence.

3) If you are intelligent and have an appealing design, then you have no further need of teachings.

^^^ :rofl :funnah :rofl (my brother did that, while i put the top up on my mustang...)

 

[lemon]

the underlying question is what you believe how the universe got to how it is today.... :dunno

personally, i dont care, it really doesnt concern me most of the time, only when i cant get to sleep and my mind just wanders to what happens after death and that just snowballs into many things... :tard



































































ps: i like sounding somewhat intelligent, even if im completely wrong

 

[karma279]

Atlantic.... you are a sophomore in HS? Absolutely amazing.... I would never have guessed that. Keep on the path that you are on brother. But beware.... don't trust all of you scholars. You will read too much into them (now knowing your age.. and age is not just a number.)
"The Path to Tranquility: Daily Wisdom" ~Dalai Lama

"The most important thing is practice in daily life; then you can
know gradually the true value of religion. Doctrine is not meant for
mere knowledge, but for the improvement of our minds. In order to do
that, it must be part of our life. If you put religious doctrine in
a building and when you leave the building depart from the practices,
you cannot gain its value." ~Dalai Lama
Everyone should take heed to this quote... regardless of their religious doctrine. I myself am a Buddhist.... not quite Zen. But who is?

Let's keep this type of discussion going..... I'm up for rolling on, or starting a new topic. Enlightenment is all about beginnings.

 

[AtlanticBlue99]

im christian, but not catholic. no offense to catholics, but why do they pray to the virgin mary? just b/c she gave birth to jesus doesnt make her worth worshiping to in my book. i would rather praise the person who took a stand for what is right and gave his life for my sins (in my faith)

there is always criticism on the whole birth scenario of jesus and if mary just pretended to be virgin... but what does all that matter? i look at jesus as a role model. he did amazing things such as turn away peer pressure, stand up for what is right, even if others think it is wrong. that is one of the lessons i've learned in life: "dont succumb to the corporate machine" dont do things just because everyone else is doing it too.. it isnt always right

i know i will never be able to turn away certain things that may seem appealing at the time, but if i learn from mistakes and try to not remake them, i will be a better person. and i will die in 70 years or so anyway so all the satisfaction i receive on earth in my life will be only temporary. complete and total satisfaction comes from a faith, so when you die, your mind and soul have a home awaiting them (at least that is what i truly believe)

 

[lemon]

Re: RE: Teaching Intelligent Design

im christian, but not catholic. no offense to catholics, but why do they pray to the virgin mary? just b/c she gave birth to jesus doesnt make her worth worshiping to in my book. i would rather praise the person who took a stand for what is right and gave his life for my sins (in my faith)

there is always criticism on the whole birth scenario of jesus and if mary just pretended to be virgin... but what does all that matter? i look at jesus as a role model. he did amazing things such as turn away peer pressure, stand up for what is right, even if others think it is wrong. that is one of the lessons i've learned in life: "dont succumb to the corporate machine" dont do things just because everyone else is doing it too.. it isnt always right

i know i will never be able to turn away certain things that may seem appealing at the time, but if i learn from mistakes and try to not remake them, i will be a better person. and i will die in 70 years or so anyway so all the satisfaction i receive on earth in my life will be only temporary. complete and total satisfaction comes from a faith, so when you die, your mind and soul have a home awaiting them (at least that is what i truly believe)

ill see you in hell bro.... :rofl :funnah :rofl just kidding man, i dont want to discourage you in your walk in life, we may believe differently, but as long as we dont declare war on each other in the name of our beliefs, i think we can get along... somehow :dunno