J.Locke777

hold on a minute, we teach about Islam and the Quran in public schools, the works of confucious, buddhism, taoism, daoism, sumarian religious beliefs, scientology (a buisness, not a religion), and greek and roman gods. Why can't we teach people about christianity too? To teach all these but not christianity is religious descrimination.

I, a christian, learned about all these religions in school and was open minded and respectful to these seprate religions and beliefssd. Am I wrong to expect the same openmindedness and respect when christianity and the bible are taught?

There is a very big error in logic made by those who wish to not teach christianity in the schools. None of the religions taught in school are presented as fact or fraud. The teachers just teach about the religion and the students make any decisions on their own.

__________________
~John Locke

Discuss the Issue, Not the Poster

"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not everyone is entitled to their own facts"
-Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan

"Great thoughts speak only to the thoughtful mind, but great actions speak to all mankind."
-Teddy Roosevelt

Slartibartfas

Its not a law, its a theory.
A misconception as perhaps someone else already wrote about the big bang is, that it was an explosion, like a bomb. The theory says something different. The matter (or energy) did not move much back then, it was the universe, the space that expanded. The position of the energy and later matter remained pretty much the same.

And the energy we are talking about, is in sum zero, just a random fluctuation diverted it apart or so. But thats already speculation, as no one can look behind the point in time when the big bang is suspected.

But you can be rest assured, that scientists are working hard on this issue, what happened afterwards. There are new telescopes planned that will take us back even further, approaching point 0 in time of the universe increasingly more.

With their data the theories perhaps can be improved drastically.

Not everything can be explained by science. No integer scientist would claim otherwise. Questions that dont fit into the scientific scheme, ie where its not possible to create a theory that is disprovable, can not be answered by scientific means.
Science does however also brings near the idea that just because itself can't give a reliable answer, not necessarely any form of belief could do so. It simply would remain guessing, no matter if one person believes in the guess, or half of mankind.
Don't blame me, blame the entertainment addictive society. People dont want to be bothered with things that are hard to understand. They want something easy and catchy.

And yes, scientific journals would be a good place to find those new theories you miss as it seems.

You want to know where really great basic science is in the working? Something I have to admit I am really fascinated about:

Its in the CERN laboratories (European Organization for Nuclear Research). The world leading particel physics facility in the world, near Geneva.

All about CERN... in 7 questions!

If this everything effecting huge effort to understand the material we and the whole universe is made out of, is not exciting science in the making, what else?

They were the first to produce antimatter there, to be exact anti-hydrogen. And now they want to give it a try, to understand, where exactly gravity comes from and how it exactly works.
The new experiment is going to be launched in May 2008, after years of construction. The Large Hadron Collider will be the by far most powerful particle accelerator on earth and reach energy densities, not too dissimilar to what is expected was present during the early phasis big bang. In order to make this possible you need the worlds largest supraconducting machine.

The ATLAS experiment

Well, lets turn the whole thing around. Tell me a few specific example of scientific theories from back then that were aired on so many stations at the same time. And dreaming for example of flying cars is no scientific theory. Its at best a vision of applying already existent scientific theories. But you are free to come up with better examples like that.

You know the tiny little difference? I am not talking about funny little prototypes constructed by layman weed smoking hippies. I am not even talking about niche products.
I am talking about serial production and of passive houses on the best way of becoming the standard of house building. I am talking about a fundamental change of how we live, not in 50 years, but within this decade.

I am not talking about blundering around in the DNA and shouting: success, success. Simply because the blundering around changed something beyond control.
I am talking about real breakthroughs. You simply can not compare biosciences of today and back than in the lets say 60's. No one with a glimpse of the progress science made would ever do so. We have decoded the ENTIRE human genome. Do you have an idea what hell of an task this was?
On the level of bacterias we are even far beyond that stage already, there we even understand the largest part of nearly everything certain bacteries can do. In the 60s or so, Watson and Crick found out that there is something like an double helix DNA. It was the time when they principally found out that the DNA somehow in a weird way encodes all informations of life.

Today we understand on the level of bacterias HOW exactly it does. How the DNA is regulated, how transcribed, translated, how Proteines self assemble themselves, What those enzymes...

Am i wasting my time here?

What people dreamed about in the 60's, is today routine. And nonetheless with every new answer dozens of questions appear.


And just take aids for example. Before aids, we had pretty little knowledge of how viruses work exactly, today nearly 20 years later, we have to accept, that we still have not found a wonder weapon. But the knowledge has nearly exploded about viruses.

I never claimed they are kept secret. Thats an invention from your side.

Read a bit about the nano theory. Read a bit about particles physics. Read a bit about molecular biology etc etc It is pretty much work in progress with tons of new things. Yes of course, the basis was lied in the early 20th century, but we can play this game eternally, I mean just because newton made already the laws of gravity centuries ago, rockets were still an amazing invention, weren't they?

Anton Zeilinger being the first man who teleported photons. And please dont start with saying that the enterprise does this already for decades...

Just some years ago, other scientists found out how cells are able to get rid of all those proteins they do not need anymore. That was a unknown until then. They found out, that an ubiquitin marker is essential and that practically it regulates that old unnecessary enzymes are to be thrown into a "trash bin enzyme" that cuts it into the basic parts, into the amino acids again. This discovery was worth the nobel prize if I am not wrong.


The claim that science was more active 50 years ago is hillarious. The scientific output is today ways larger than back then and believe me, not because scientists only write rubbish. If you want major break throughs of the last time, have a look at the scientific prizes, not at last the Nobel prizes for physics, chemistry or physiology and medicine.
I am no walking library nor an expert on those fields, so you can have a look there for more conclusive informations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...and_technology

__________________
"Every country gets the cuisine it deserves"

Common insult examples and how to avoid them

Locke9-05

The Bible is included in most public school curriculum. It doesn't dwell on it, but why should it? Religion shouldn't be taught in public schools, and it really isn't. The curriculum only mentions the different religions associated with historic events and cultures. Never does the curriculum encourage the practice of one religion over the other, nor does it condemn any religion.

__________________
"Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country."
-John F. Kennedy

"Education begins the gentleman, but reading, good company and reflection must finish him."
-John Locke

"What worries you, masters you."
-John Locke
___________________

presluc

So as sceintist of this new era, what you got?
You decoded the human genome, and you changed the big bang theory from a explosion to an expansion.
Back in the 70's some guy presented a huge breakthrough to soceity he had a mouse run through a maze to get cheese, needless to say a majority were not impressed, after all what good is this theory to humanity?
Edison, I thought he was a sceintist, Salk, I thought he was a biologist, I thought Franklin, was a sceintist,and many others.
The differance is they did something to help the human race.
The sceintist of the past talked about sceince and then acted and produced something.
Today sceintist just talk, and somebody comes up with a new version of a cell phone
Those fat government grants are about to become a lot thinner in the near future.
Cause like it or not people are going to start asking questions just like they did about the Iraq war, you know how popular that is today in America?

Locke9-05

That may be, but people need to start asking the right kinds of questions. The Iraq war for instance: we're there. It's happening as we speak.

Don't question why we're there, don't organize protests. Instead of griping and whining about sending soldiers over there, and the casualties our military suffers, give our soldiers support. There's a major difference between honoring the fallen, and complaining about "unnecessary" casualties.

This topic is obviously not focused around the Iraq war, sorry about that little sidenote, it isn't my intention to divert from the topic. Back on track now:

And as for science versus religion in public schools:

People will decide to follow what best suits their personal needs. It's our way of human instinct. If someone wishes to dedicate their life or at least a portion of their life to faith and spirituality, so be it. The same goes with someone who wishes to follow the lifestyle of an atheist or agnostic.

But the Bible should not be taught in schools. Nor should the Qu'ran or the Torah, etc. Religion is not necessary for achieving success in the eyes of society. Religions of the world should be mentioned in history curriculum when relating to historic eras and cultures, but aside from that, there's really no place for religion in the public school setting

__________________
"Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country."
-John F. Kennedy

"Education begins the gentleman, but reading, good company and reflection must finish him."
-John Locke

"What worries you, masters you."
-John Locke
___________________

Brother Oz

I disagree, because we have to live together. If you invite the Jews next door around for dinner and serve pork, it's going to be rather embarrassing. I think we should teach the very basics of each religion, so that we can live alongside each other. If people want to know enough to join that religion, that's for them to do themselves.

__________________
... I am surprised at your insolence in writing to me at all. You know, as I know, that I bought this constituency... may God's curse light upon you and may it make your women as open and as free to the excise officers as your wives and daughters have always been to me while I have represented your scoundrel corporation.
I have the honour to be... your obliged humble servant, Anthony Henley
- MPs reply to constituent, mid 1700s

Slartibartfas

Thats simply not true. Its an insult towards thousands of hard working and successful American scientists.

I gave you lots of incentives to carry on your own little research if you like. You are downplaying the scientific progress so terrificly much that it really hurts.

And what are you suggesting with your last sentence? Do you put the expenses for science and research in question? Well, do what you like, but let me assure you one thing, the world won't wait for you. If you are eager on getting left behind in the constantly progressing world, no one will stop you. Currently nothing would indicate something like this could happen. But if your your hostile opinion towards contemporary science should be common throughout the US, inverstors should start to worry about the long term future of the American economy. Chinese and Indian scientists will be eager to replace you, don't worry.

PS:
Have you even looked at the examples I gave you and at the links? How would you call it, if scientists would succeed in coming up with confirming an until now totally theoratical theory on gravity by practical evidence in the worlds largest machine? Whats that if not working on a new fundamental theory of physics?

And regarding your sarcastic remark towards the progress in molecular biology. What happened is actually that in the 60's they found out that houses are made out of stones. In the beginning 21st century they decoded the exact plan for building a cathedral out of stones. And with a single line you tell me thats just talk like you would suggest who needs the plans for cathedrals if we know already that somehow in an undefined way it is theoratically possible to build simple and bold homes out of stones.

PPS:
Merkel is physician. The king discipline of natural science.

__________________
"Every country gets the cuisine it deserves"

Common insult examples and how to avoid them

presluc

Well first of all if one does not question they become a robot following lockstep behind whoever is in charge.
However the one in charge may be mistaken ,or he may have bad intelligence, or he maybe just lieing.
Ergo questions, if the boys in D.C. or the State Capitol want me to stop questioning they need do only one thing.
MAKE ME EXTEPT FROM ALL TAXES.
Since that is not going to happen you can call it griping ,you can call it whining, or any other adjective, however to me it is an interogotive sentence nothing more.
And in my opinion there should be more of them.
As you said back on track.
Evolution based on the big bang theory is taught in schools is it not?
Can this "theory" be proven with iron clad proof.
Religion is a beleif based on faith in something that can not be proven with iron clad proof.
I beleive in God does that make me an unstable person?
If someone beleives in the big bang or expansion ,or whatever you call it,does that make them an unstable person?
The answer to both these questions is of course NO.
I have stood outside a church and dicussed evolution.
So what's the problem with teaching a divine intervention along with the big bang\expansion of space theory.
Are these sceintist and hard thinkers afraid of a little competion?
You have said that people will follow their best suits for their personal needs.
Isn't it true that at the present time education caters more to the atheist, and the agnostic?
Which brings up another question WHY?
If indeed we have the right to choose over two ways of thinking neither of which can be proven why not present both sides?

presluc

If you want praise for the todays "hard thinkers" go to a sceintific convention or attend a fundraiser for sceintist.
The average hard workers are still waiting for an alterntive fuel sourse while oil companies take them to the cleaners at the pumps.
Average hard workers are pateintly waiting for a prevention to the aids virus.
Average hard workers want to hear somethiong besides "well we went to the moon" again or "well we went to the orbiting space station" again.
Or how about this one "this cellphone is a computer and also takes pictures".
PHAH, I heard the announcement when they launched "sputnik"
Saw the first steps made on the moon.
Saw my mother with polio a decade too late for the cure.
Saw the gas lines and riots of the 70's while the Auto ceo's and the oil ceo's set on their ass and still got reserch and developement money.
Do not lecture me on the great strides of sceintific progress.
If it was there it would be news, not hidden in some computer link on the backside of communications.
Any news media would leap at the chance to show something good on the news you know that, I know that.
And yes it is my opinion that more sceintist have become too busy writing books or lecturing on a therory for money to get any sceintific work done.
Do I fear being left behind, Hell, I could take one step a day and catch up with the "wonders" of this century by the end of the month.

Ygorl

We doom ourselves. Our faith fails us and we replace it with "rational thought". But there is no love in thought, nothing that lusts in deduction, only death in rationalism. Worshippers of the great, false God called rationality.

__________________
Why do liberals oppose capitalism except when it produces or promotes perversions and/or degeneracy ?