Royal Society supports teaching Creationism in science classes:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/science/article4734767.ece?print=yes&randnum=1221539677440

__________________
1977 300d 70k--sold 08
1985 300TD 185k+
1984 307d 126k--sold 8/03
1985 409d 65k--sold 06
1984 300SD 315k--daughter's car
1979 300SD 122k--sold 2/11
1999 Fuso FG Expedition Camper
1993 GMC Sierra 6.5 TD 4x4
1982 Bluebird Wanderlodge CAT 3208--Sold 2/13

Well I guess we can't bash Saudi Arabia for doing that anymore.

__________________
1999 SL500
1969 280SE
2023 Ram 1500
2007 Tiara 3200

The "Rev Michael Reiss?" I guess that pretty much sums it up right there.

- Peter.

__________________
2021 Chevrolet Spark
Formerly...
2000 GMC Sonoma
1981 240D 4spd stick. 347000 miles. Deceased Feb 14 2021
2002 Kia Rio. Worst crap on four wheels
1981 240D 4spd stick. 389000 miles.
1984 123 200
1979 116 280S
1972 Cadillac Sedan DeVille
1971 108 280S

I don't see why you would want to teach creationism in a school. there are so many different creation stories that teaching one would not fit for all students. so they ether need to have a creationism class or just leave it out.

as far as intelligent design is concerned, I think that should be at least mentioned in schools. I work for an engineer, and when i went through my science classes and the teacher was telling me how everything happened at random, and how biological goo from comet bombardment brought about life. I found that hard to believe. have you ever seen a building built at random? think of a structure your rend neck cousin built, or the shanties in Africa. those had intelligent design, yet they are horrible. when looking at the systems of the body and to think they didn't have any design at all, not even an Ethiopian, I just do see how that would work.

If you teach science all the way back to the big bang, you are still left with it coming from no where. Yes there are theories past the Big Bang, but there is no way to find evidence to back any of them up.

I'm a huge science buff. but after learning how our world works, and all the design that goes into making the simplest of thing like concrete work, its beyond my comprehension that something as complex as biology has no design to it at all.

__________________

[QUOTE=SirNik84;1966249] I found that had to believe. have you ever seen a building built at random? think of a structure your rend neck cousin built, or the shanties in Africa. those had intelligent design, yet they are horrible. when looking at the systems of the body and to think they didn't have any design at all, not even and Ethiopian, I just do see how that would work.
[QUOTE]

Bee hives and ant's nests are structures that don't seem horrible yet they are not intelligently designed.
Ant lions build ingenious traps without the benefit of intelligent design.

Humans seem to build the least intelligently designed structures.

__________________
1977 300d 70k--sold 08
1985 300TD 185k+
1984 307d 126k--sold 8/03
1985 409d 65k--sold 06
1984 300SD 315k--daughter's car
1979 300SD 122k--sold 2/11
1999 Fuso FG Expedition Camper
1993 GMC Sierra 6.5 TD 4x4
1982 Bluebird Wanderlodge CAT 3208--Sold 2/13

I believe animals are intelligent. I had a chi-wa-wa that could climb a ladder and open a door. don't tell me thats not intelligent.

__________________

But the animal lacks the quality which you thought was important--the intelligence of an engineer which requires forethought, planning, experimentation. Bees, ants, ant lions and dogs don't have that, yet they engage in behavior's that you describe as intelligent. Hence, intelligence does not require a designer.

__________________
1977 300d 70k--sold 08
1985 300TD 185k+
1984 307d 126k--sold 8/03
1985 409d 65k--sold 06
1984 300SD 315k--daughter's car
1979 300SD 122k--sold 2/11
1999 Fuso FG Expedition Camper
1993 GMC Sierra 6.5 TD 4x4
1982 Bluebird Wanderlodge CAT 3208--Sold 2/13

I suppose you have to ask yourself, is your body more complex then your Mercedes.

If you answer yes, then ask yourself, can a dog or bee build a Mercedes.

If you answer no, then why is it that your medical procedures cost more then a oil change.

__________________

You really think that Isaac Newton would be turning on his grave? Which Newton are you referring to? The Newton below:

Isaac Newton's religious views influenced his lifetime of work. Sir Isaac Newton was an English physicist, mathematician, astronomer, natural philosopher, and alchemist. While Newton's fame came from his work in the field of science, his work on Biblical hermeneutics was the work he most loved. He also wrote many works that would now be classified as occult studies.

Newton wrote a number of religious tracts dealing with the literal interpretation of the Bible, as he considered himself to be one of a select group of individuals who were specially chosen by God for the task of understanding Biblical scripture. Newton’s conception of the physical world provided a stable model of the natural world that would reinforce stability and harmony in the civic world. The law of gravity became Newton's best-known discovery, but Newton saw a monotheistic God as the masterful creator whose existence could not be denied in the face of the grandeur of all creation.

Although born into an Anglican family, by his thirties Newton held a Christian faith that, had it been made public, would not be considered orthodox by mainstream Christianity;in recent times he has been described as heretical to orthodoxy.

Though he is better known for his love of science, the Bible was Sir Isaac Newton's greatest passion. He devoted more time to the study of Scripture than to science, and he said, "I have a fundamental belief in the Bible as the Word of God, written by those who were inspired. I study the Bible daily."[4] He spent a great deal of time trying to discover hidden messages within the Bible. After 1690, Newton wrote a number of religious tracts dealing with the literal interpretation of the Bible. In a manuscript Newton wrote in 1704 in which he describes his attempts to extract scientific information from the Bible, he estimated that the world would end no earlier than 2060. In predicting this he said, "This I mention not to assert when the time of the end shall be, but to put a stop to the rash conjectures of fanciful men who are frequently predicting the time of the end, and by doing so bring the sacred prophesies into discredit as often as their predictions fail."

Newton saw God as the masterful creator whose existence could not be denied in the face of the grandeur of all creation. But the unforeseen theological consequence of his conception of God, as Leibniz pointed out, was that God was now entirely removed from the world’s affairs, since the need for intervention would only evidence some imperfection in God’s creation, something impossible for a perfect and omnipotent creator. Newton's view has been considered to be close to deism but differed in that he invoked God as a special physical cause to keep the planets in orbits. He warned against using the law of gravity to view the universe as a mere machine, like a great clock. He said:

“ Gravity explains the motions of the planets, but it cannot explain who set the planets in motion. God governs all things and knows all that is or can be done.

This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent Being. … This Being governs all things, not as the soul of the world, but as Lord over all; and on account of his dominion he is wont to be called “Lord God” παντοκρατωρ [pantokratōr], or “Universal Ruler”. … The Supreme God is a Being eternal, infinite, absolutely perfect.

Opposition to godliness is atheism in profession and idolatry in practice. Atheism is so senseless and odious to mankind that it never had many professors.”

On the other hand, latitudinarian and Newtonian ideas taken too far resulted in the millenarians, a religious faction dedicated to the concept of a mechanical universe, but finding in it the same enthusiasm and mysticism that the Enlightenment had fought so hard to extinguish. Newton himself may have had some interest in millenarianism as he wrote about both the Book of Daniel and the Book of Revelation in his Observations Upon the Prophecies. In a manuscript he wrote in 1704 in which he describes his attempts to extract scientific information from the Bible, he estimated that the world would end no earlier than 2060. In predicting this he said, "This I mention not to assert when the time of the end shall be, but to put a stop to the rash conjectures of fanciful men who are frequently predicting the time of the end, and by doing so bring the sacred prophesies into discredit as often as their predictions fail."

Newton’s conception of the physical world provided a stable model of the natural world that would reinforce stability and harmony in the civic world.

Newton"s Religious Views

Just checking!

__________________
Current Benzes

1989 300TE "Alice"
1990 300CE "Sam Spade"
1991 300CE "Beowulf" RIP (06.1991 - 10.10.2007)
1998 E320 "Orson"
2002 C320 Wagon "Molly Fox"

Res non semper sunt quae esse videntur

My Gallery

Not in this weather!

It was a trick question. Newton was an intelligent designer of sorts who seemed to have thought that we had not yet discovered the Prime Mover but it was possible that we might.

__________________
1977 300d 70k--sold 08
1985 300TD 185k+
1984 307d 126k--sold 8/03
1985 409d 65k--sold 06
1984 300SD 315k--daughter's car
1979 300SD 122k--sold 2/11
1999 Fuso FG Expedition Camper
1993 GMC Sierra 6.5 TD 4x4
1982 Bluebird Wanderlodge CAT 3208--Sold 2/13

"Trick question???"

"Intelligent designer???"

"Of sorts???"

"Seemed to have thought that we had not yet discovered the Prime Mover???"

Are you serious? Newton believed in the existence of ONE God who CREATED the Universe and that the Universe moves according to RULES set by its CREATOR, i.e., God.

There is no equivocation at all.

__________________
Current Benzes

1989 300TE "Alice"
1990 300CE "Sam Spade"
1991 300CE "Beowulf" RIP (06.1991 - 10.10.2007)
1998 E320 "Orson"
2002 C320 Wagon "Molly Fox"

Res non semper sunt quae esse videntur

My Gallery

Not in this weather!

So we only know as far back as the Big Bang. Is that such a bad thing?

Just because you cannot understand it doesn't mean that it is impossible. 200 years ago, we could say the same thing as the theory or relativity.

__________________
01 Ford Excursion Powerstroke
99 E300 Turbodiesel
91 Vette with 383 motor
05 Polaris Sportsman 800 EFI
06 Polaris Sportsman 500 EFI
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Red
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Yellow
04 Tailgator 21 ft Toy Hauler
11 Harley Davidson 883 SuperLow

As in everything else, Newton was not so simply explained. At different times he was a strict trinitarian, a sort of deist, and a sort of numerological mystic (for lack of a more accurate term). He was a very complicated man who could be profoundly generous and also extremely prideful and jealous. Calling on him as a patron saint is asking for a contradiction.

Back on subject.

Shame on the Royal Society! It's not Newton rolling in his grave, it's Huxley.

B

Doesn't make him right. He believed in his 3 laws too. Too bad they don't work in the sub atomic world.

__________________
01 Ford Excursion Powerstroke
99 E300 Turbodiesel
91 Vette with 383 motor
05 Polaris Sportsman 800 EFI
06 Polaris Sportsman 500 EFI
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Red
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Yellow
04 Tailgator 21 ft Toy Hauler
11 Harley Davidson 883 SuperLow

It is true that, as with all men of great intellegence, Newton was (and remains) a complex individual and a hard read.

When it comes to the creation of the Universe, however, Newton believed in creation and that God (however he may have conceived him to be) was the Creator.

To even suggest that Newton may be turning on his grave because they may teach Creationism in school is not accurate.

__________________
Current Benzes

1989 300TE "Alice"
1990 300CE "Sam Spade"
1991 300CE "Beowulf" RIP (06.1991 - 10.10.2007)
1998 E320 "Orson"
2002 C320 Wagon "Molly Fox"

Res non semper sunt quae esse videntur

My Gallery

Not in this weather!