Evolution v Intelligent Design; Should we really teach evolution?

hmmmm i must be confused i thought this was discussion about teaching evolution or ID or both in USA public schools. sorry... ive been posting in the wrong thread haha

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The forces of causation. Everything that happens either is done with or without intent, and that's what I can apply to the origins of the universe.

Then so many other things shouldn't be taught either. Regardless, they are scientific concepts, and therefore deserve to be taught as such

The problem is you can't be specific, so being specific would simply be foolish.

Not at all; geography was my strong subject.

Detail is relevant, but if you don't have details, and you have no way of obtaining them, then it's foolish to throw wild imaginings onto the concept. The concept that our universe was created isn't illogical. However, once you start throwing all sorts of wild details and angels and demons and heaven and hell and all of this, which you can't base off anything at all, it becomes illogical.

Church? Why teach a non religous concept in a religious place?
Science classes are best suited for this sort of thing; what other class? History? Language? No, science! We could teach it alongside other no-evidence ideas such as dark matter or string theory.

See above.

So you find the idea that life on earth was influenced by a higher intelligence, such as an alien civ, completely illogical and ridiculous? I don't.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Oli, watch this interesting video on DMT, the spirit, and the Afterlife

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MQUGjd21MA


After all of this, it's ridiculous to think there ISN'T an afterlife.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Here's another great video. If after this you are not convinced, well, I tried

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3445312818256670700&ei=tWKwSIfCBaeuqQKR05XfDA&q=NDE&hl=en

 

So a drug KNOWN to cause hallucinations is sometimes released by the brain when we're suffering the stress of dying.
Okay... and after that they start talking about "hallucinogens release the spirit from the known laws of physics".
Um, science?
No.
Proof?
No.
Not even an indicator.
It's an hallucinogenic they cause you you to see and experience things that aren't real!

"these entities [the ones "met" by people under the influence of DMT] are benevolent, but some aren't"
Oookaaay, what sort of data is that?

 

See the second video. Also, NDE's occur in people who have never ever even touched drugs.

It isn't scientific data, true, but if you rely solely on the empirical, that is foolish

 

Here is a list of some good circumstancial evidence that a soul exists

(1) NDEs occur while patients are brain dead.
(2) Out-of-body perception during NDEs has been verified.
(3) People born blind can see during an NDE.
(4) NDEs demonstrate the return of consciousness from death.
(5) The NDE study by Raymond Moody has been replicated.
(6) Experimental evidence suggests that NDEs are real.
(7) NDEs can be considered to be an objective experience.
(8) NDEs have been validated in scientific studies.
(9) Out-of-body experiences (OBEs) have been validated in scientific studies.
(10) Autoscopy during NDEs have been validated in scientific studies.
(11) A transcendental "sixth sense" of the human mind has been found.
(12) NDEs support the "holonomic" theory of consciousness.
(13) The expansion of consciousness reported in NDEs supports consciousness theories.
(14) The brain's connection to a greater power has been validated by indisputable scientific facts.
(15) The replication of NDEs using hallucinogenic drugs satisfies the scientific method.
(16) NDEs are different from hallucinations.
(17) The replication of NDEs using a variety of triggers satisfies the scientific method.
(18) Apparitions of the deceased have been induced under scientific controls.
(19) People having NDEs have brought back scientific discoveries.
(20) NDEs have advanced the field of medical science.
(21) NDEs have advanced the field of psychology.
(22) NDEs correspond to the "quirky" principles found in quantum physics.
(23) The transcendental nature of human consciousness during NDEs corresponds to principles found in quantum physics.
(24) NDEs have advanced the fields of philosophy and religion.
(25) NDEs have the nature of an archetypal initiatory journey.
(26) People have been clinically dead for several days and report the most profound NDEs.
(27) NDEs have produced visions of the future which later prove to be true.
(28) Groups of dying people can share the same NDE.
(29) Experiencers are convinced the NDE is an afterlife experience.
(30) The NDEs of children are remarkably similar to adult NDEs.
(31) Experiencers of NDEs are profoundly changed in ways that cannot occur from hallucinations and dreams.
(32) NDEs cannot be explained merely by brain chemistry alone.
(33) NDEs have been reported by people since the dawn of recorded history.
(34) The skeptical "dying brain" theory of NDEs has serious flaws.
(35) Skeptical arguments against the NDE "survival theory" are not valid.
(36) The burden of proof has shifted to the skeptics of the survival theory.
(37) Other anomalous phenomena supports the survival theory.
(38) NDEs support the existence of reincarnation.
(39) The scientific evidence supporting reincarnation also supports the survival theory.
(40) Xenoglossy supports reincarnation and the survival theory.
(41) Past-life regression supports reincarnation and the survival theory.
(42) Contact with "the deceased" has occurred under scientific controls.
(43) After-death communications have been reported by credible people.
(44) Dream research supports the NDE and survival theory.
(45) Deathbed visions support the NDE and survival theory.
(46) Remote viewing supports the NDE and survival theory.
(47) The efficacy of prayer has been demonstrated under scientific controls.
(48) The "Scole Experiments" during the 1990s support the NDE and survival theory.
(49) Electronic voice phenomena (EVP) supports the NDE and survival theory.
(50) Prominent atheists have had NDEs which caused them to believe in the afterlife.
(51) Psychometry supports the NDE and survival theory



More details, such as an explanation of them, can be found at the following link

http://www.near-death.com/evidence.html

 

Not to mention:

And perhaps some of the most compelling:

And,

 

Wrong: the video states that DMT is formed IN THE BRAIN while dying, so previous drug use is irrelevant.
They become users when the pineal creates DMT for them...

Hallucinogens formed in the body while dying invalidate that.

p

To what degree of reliability?

So?
I understand people born blind also sometimes dream with vision.

Um, "I nearly died but I didn't actually" proves what?
Other than the patient recovered.

Many pseudoscience experiments have been replicated.
What level of reliability do they have?

How can they be considered to be "objective" when they rely purely on single-witness reports backed up after the event by others that were in a stress situation?

As what?
Something other than hallucination and/ or peripheral information gathering?

I doubt it.
Not by real scientists.

Again, what level of reliability?
Hallucinations/ peripheral information processing...

Wrong, considering that at last count we had around 22 senses anyway.
Transcendental? Do tell.

So what? You can find "support" for all sorts of things but until one or the other is proven then they're just interesting data to be investigated and filed.

Expansion of consciousness? Hallucinations...

Now this I find totally unbelievable. Scienctific verfication that there IS a "greater power" let alone a connection with it would have rocked science to its core.

Which supports your theory how?
And invalidates mine how?

In what respect?

So?
The sunjects were human, therefore prone to common human tropes and archetypes for hallucination.

name just ONE.

ALL human "sicknesses" advance mediacl science one way or another - even war.
Surgery improved massively because of the need to treat wounds *especially bullet and fragment wounds).

There's a surprise - a field that studies the brain and thought processes benefits from investigating people undefrgoing hallicinations...

(23) The transcendental nature of human consciousness during NDEs corresponds to principles found in quantum physics.
Oh yeah, and a political party here in the UK claims that ancient Sanskrit poetry fallows the form of parrticle equations from quantum physics: therefore one day we can all levitate because quantum physics "proves" the scripts are right.

Religion?
Does religion "advance" at all?
Philosophy?
Oh we gave it some thought...

Because they were human and MUST experience the archetypical hallucinations.

Several days?
Regardless intensity of hallucination doesn't make it any more "real".

So have wild guesses, science fiction writers and oija boards.
None if which is sufficiently weighty to put any serious belief into it.

Since they were all human...

There's a complete list of how dreams and halluciantions can change people?
People can undergo radical change just by thinking and coming to a conscious realisation...

I'll believe that when the definitive book on brain chemistry is written and there's no more to learn from study.

So have ghosts, goblins etc.
Proves nothing except that we're still the basic model underneath.

Which are...?

Nope: the claim still has to be supported.

Again: support isn't proof.

Ooh link please: science here's a bombshell.
I doubt it.

Credibility precludes mistakes?

Again, support does not.... and remote viewing is just as spurious.

Actually it was totally invalidated...

Support is not...

Atheists are still human... and atheists can convert with ot without nearly dying.

Support isn't... Pyschometry?
Another la la la "discipline"

Reading the link now...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

The mere fact that people with NDE's can recall, and move about, the world and accurately recall what they witness disproves hallucinations. Not to mention group NDE's; let me guess, that's also a "hallucination"?

Oh please. Well, I won't tell you "I told you so" in the afterlife

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Okay here's a typical example of the actual "scientific support" NDE as real has:
(19) People having NDEs have brought back scientific discoveries.

So a woman had a "premonition" AFTER (note that - after) her NDE and it turned out to correct.
And they claim this as
A) NDE did it - after all no-one EVER has premonitions without an NDE. Oh, wait...
B) it's a "scientific discovery". Sheesh, science just got far easier...

The entire list is equally factual.
They're grasping at straws.
And non-existent straws at that...

 

Group NDE's....please disprove that. You can't.

The soul exists

 

I've just looked at a few more links from that site.
Follow a heading stating "incontrovertible proof that..." and EVERY subsequent source given has "if X and Y are true then..." or "it would seem that..."
The entire thing is dishonest and misleading.
Apparently deliberately so.

 

Common heritage: common hallucinations.
Look up the dynamics of eyewitness groups and how they reinforce each other even on known-to-be-incorrect statements....

 

Ridiculous; the testimony and evidence is there.

 

FFalse testimony and deliberately misinterpreted evidence judging by that site.
The guy is a self-promoting charlatan.

 

False? NDE's have been recorded since forever. Now you just sound like you're in denial.

 

Lots of things with no basis in fact have been recorded sionce forever.
It doesn't make them real.
Every single point on that extensive list you gave turned out to be a deception.

 

A deception? Rofl. Deception means "lie"

 

So what word would you use when the site states "incontrovertible proof" and the referenced sources all use the words "if true then..." and "it would appear..."?
Does that fit your definition of "incontrovertible" more nearly than "deception"?
Yes: that list is an outright lie.