Science vs. Religion-Education in America (Dover Case)

ID-‘Not science’: Judge John E. Jones That would be Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, in which parents in Dover, Pa., took the school board to court …
Video Rating: 4 / 5

This study explored if connections were made by teachers and students in schools between religious education (RE) and health and physical education (HPE) key…

25 Responses to Science vs. Religion-Education in America (Dover Case)

  1. Steve Squaw says:

    Who made god?

  2. FreeeeS says:

    I like this ANCHOR!!!

  3. Hasnain Mohammed says:

    Let alone you! How could some of the scientists permit themselves to make a
    claim that would necessitate knowledge as extensive as the scheme of the
    universe, when their knowledge of the total scheme of being is *close* to
    zero, when confronted with a whole mass of unknowns concerning this very
    earth and tangible, lifeless matter, let alone the whole universe?

  4. OptimalElement says:

    Its pointless dealing with what we think or believe. We have to look at the
    evidence and facts and derive conclusions from that. For materialists the
    primary cause of the universe is UNKNOWN. For theist its God, but he has no
    evidence to back it up. Maybe their is cause behind it, or maybe its just a
    natural phenomena we don’t yet understand. Neither side knows enough to
    conclude. We used to think rainbows and earthquakes has God behind it too.
    Does it? That is why I’m skeptical of God argument.

  5. Hasnain Mohammed says:

    In just the same way that atheist regards matter as eternal, believers in
    God attribute eternity to God. Belief in an eternal being is then common to
    materialist and religious philosophers: both groups agree that there is a
    primary cause, but believers in God regard the primary cause as wise,
    all-knowing, and possessing the power of decision and will, whereas in the
    view of the materialists, the primary cause has neither consciousness,
    intelligence, perception, nor the power of decision.

  6. hydra100100 says:

    The big bang theory and the theory of evolution have NO religious
    implications. They describe events and processes by using facts and
    evidence. They are supported by a multitude of peer reviewed articles. Even
    calling ID a theory shows just how little that man knows about science, or
    he is being deceitful.

  7. Hasnain Mohammed says:

    The atheist Delusion! We can raise precisely the same objection against
    them and ask them, “If we follow the chain of causality back, we will
    ultimately reach the primary cause. Let us say that cause is not God, but
    matter. Tell us who created primary matter. You who believe in the law of
    causality, answer us Ws: if matter is the ultimate cause of all things,
    what is the cause of matter? You say that the source of all phenomena is
    matter-energy; what is the cause and origin of matter-energy?”

  8. Kyla Barranco says:

    God made science if the Big Bang was real you know who made it that’s right

  9. Parsa Mansouri says:

    Its true that religion has almost no evidence backing it up however when a
    piece of evidence, scientific evidence comes up supporting creationism, it
    should not be over looked. The only way our society can advance is if we
    take found evidence and seriously debate the facts to come to a conclusion.
    If we didn’t we would still believe that the earth is flat. (although if
    evidence supporting the earth being flat comes up it should be taken

  10. Nazreen Abraham says:

    True true…But i like the idea though….Aliens influencing with our
    evolution…It has Prometheus written all over it…Maybe i just love to
    dream of hope..Hope some one else in this universe who is not as stupid as
    mankind…Nevertheless truth is always bitter and some just cant handle
    it…Thus the invention of God and Creations….

  11. natchal1 says:

    Science never has and never will deal with the existence of a god or gods
    as science relies on testable theories in the natural world not untestable
    theories in a supernatural world.Christians in general say constantly that
    science is anti god but then again they say the same thing about anything
    that goes against their religious beliefs in a book that claims the moon
    generates its own light as found in Genesis 1:15 to the earth being flat as
    it claims in Isaiah 11:12 and Dan 4:10-11.

  12. directtalk1 says:

    Religious people have 2 golden rules: 1. Ignore all rational thought 2.
    When forced to face rational thought, refer to rule 1

  13. LesPaul2006 says:

    Ancient people believed the Earth was flat. Why did they believe that?
    BECAUSE THAT’S WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE from a human’s point of view. Doesn’t
    mean is true. Now, how is anyone going to say that life was designed
    because it “looks” designed?

  14. Hasnain Mohammed says:

    Since the chain of causality cannot recede into infinity, they can answer
    only that matter is an eternal and timeless entity for which no beginning
    can be posited: matter is non-created, has no beginning or end, and its
    being arises from within its own nature. This means that the materialists
    accept the principle of eternity and non-origination; they believe that all
    things arose out of eternal matter and that being arises from within the
    very nature of matter, without any need for a creator.

  15. OptimalElement says:

    Basically your talking about the origin of the universe. How the universe
    happened is a question that has not been answered yet and if we are to
    answer this question correctly we must approach it using experimental
    evidence, theoretical physics. When you say God did it, you proved nothing.
    You just made up an answer with nothing to back it up. What strikes me
    about the religious is that they claim absolute knowledge, yet it is them
    who know least. They simply have an elusion of knowledge.

  16. Kyla Barranco says:

    Science without religion is blind. Religion without science is lame.
    Something along those lines

  17. Sean Cosenza says:

    ID is not science and will never be science unless biology, physics or any
    real science decides it needs a name change and they just so happen to like
    the name intelligent design.

  18. Nazreen Abraham says:

    Not really…..Creation mainly talks about God creating everything…
    Intelligent Designs means interference in the evolutionary process by some
    sort of intelligent life forms. Like how human effects the dogs breeds. But
    i doubt most religious people thinks an alien come and help design things.
    If anything this case about The Bacterial Flagellum only proves that there
    might be aliens interfering with our past. hahahahahaha….

  19. Parsa Mansouri says:

    I’m saying this even though I think the theory of evolution has more
    evidence than creationism.

  20. Hasnain Mohammed says:

    The atheist Delusion! Your delusion that science has put out the notion of
    God is purely *rhetorical* and has nothing to do with logical method,
    because even thousands of scientific experiments could not possibly suffice
    to demonstrate that no non-material being or factor exists. Your delusion
    is nothing more than a *fanatical* illusion based on unproven theories.

  21. leerman22 says:

    I always imagined that time gets inverted after passing through a black
    hole, then the singularity expands into a white hole or big bang. This way
    energy and mass stays conserved/eternal. A god would have to break this law
    which is imposable. Then creationists use special pleading to say an
    unfalsifiable god can break laws of physics in which case they still can’t
    prove anything (My crazy white hole theory can be disproven).

  22. andre34343 says:

    God is good 😀

  23. David Miller says:

    This has already been debated in the scientific community and ID has no
    proof versus volumes of evidence in favor of evolution. These people are
    trying to use myth to argue against science, which is ridiculous. Abrams
    nails it though, I am impressed.

  24. loung tran says:

    Intelligent design and creation is the same fucking thing

  25. Hasnain Mohammed says:

    Do scientific discoveries and knowledge cause such a scientist to conclude
    that matter, *unknowing and unperceiving *, is his creator and that of all
    beings? No? Then how can the duped atheists and some of the scientists
    delude themselve and *believe* that hydrogen and oxygen, electrons and
    protons, should first produce themselves, then be the source for all other
    beings, and finally decree the laws that regulate themselves and the rest
    of the material world?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *