Creationism in schools

Hahaha, so "thinly" veiled that billions of people have missed it. We're so lucky that you and that guy in that book came along to piont out such an obvious thing that so very, very many people missed.

Still, as much as I think your idea is obvious nonsense I supposed I can spend a moment to point out one or two reasons why.

First mistake: that diagram shows the brain as being the same width as height. Whatever those bizarre "units" are, the diagram shows a brain which is in the ratio 30:30:50. In reality, the typical brain could be described as 30:45:53, or 20:30:36, which is notably different. Still, thats a minor point.

Length of human spinal cord = 450 mm (male); 430 mm (female)
Length of human vertebral column 710mm (male); 610 mm (female)

I'm not sure whether your idea of the "whole central nervous system" refers to the spinal cord or the vertebral column, or something else. If its the spinal cord, then these 300 "units" correspond to 450mm - thats 1.5mm per unit, which would make the brain just 75mm wide, which is way off. If it refers to the whole vertebral column then those 300 units are 710mm at best, which makes each unit 2.3mm, and the brain 69x69x115mm, which is still nowhere near enough.

In short: despite self-confessed fudging of the units, the measurements of your 'ark' are still complete bollocks.

Next problem: "names and visions of every animal "? Please do explain how Noah had the name and vision of animals he had never seen from around the world. God's magic? Please do explain what happened to make humans forget that they ever knew the names and visions of animals from around the world. God's magic? Please do explain WHY he bothered to pass the names and visions of animals from around the world, knowing that a great many of them would be forgotten.

Next problem: This idea of associating biblical names with somewhat nebulous ideas of race, quite apart from being a massively stretching attempt to rationalise away the ludicrousness of the story, is completely arbitrary. You speak of Noah, Ham, Shem and Jephath as races. Why stop there? Why not Arphaxad, Salah, Eber Peleg and all the rest? The answer, plainly, is because someone decided that 22 was the number to use. I don't know whether the number 22 was decided on first, and the number of 'races' shoehorned to fit, or whether the number of races was counted, and then 22 biblical names selected to represent them. But either way: some names are used, others are not. The only consistent explanation is that this was done arbitrarily to rationalise things post-hoc.

That's enough for now, it was entertaining, but as it's plain that you won't listen to reason I dont feel like wasting more of my time on this piffle.

 

Well actually I do. To make sure I did (and hadn't gotten things mixed around), I looked it up before hand as I do with a lot of things. The difference was mainly time scale. The term is often used incorrectly towards limits in the amount of change that can occur in a species. Such as a cat which has different traits, but the cat is still a cat.

The problem I have with evolution or creation being taught in schools is in the last part of your post. It does have effects on things like ethics and philosophy, important thing which can be life altering. I think kids should be allowed to think critically at schools, looking at evidence and ideas and deciding for themselves what to choose. The decision on something which can be so important to the way a society thinks or goes about problems should not be taught in schools (are we a divine creation, or the result of many years of natural selection). it has few real advantages in comparison zoology and virology can be done without it (I mean the teaching of changes from one species to another), though perhaps there maybe some much larger benefit benefit I am not seeing.

Lastly I would like to say that I am not trying to have a bias, and trying think critically. Hence why I haven't said anything clearly supporting or rejecting evolution. I have also repeated that I am not trying to prove or disprove creation or evolution, only stating my reasons for why neither should be in schools. I am trying to do what I would have students do. Think critically and decide for themselves by reading up on all the ideas they wish, and questioning them as they so choose. Not being told one thing or another is fact without question.

 

Thanks for taking a look at the blog anyway!

I personally thought that the description of an infinite number of Big Bang events going back into infinite time in the past as given by Mellen Benedict after his NDE was brilliant. I suppose you might disagree??

http://www.near-death.com/experiences/reincarnation04.html#a05

(Mellen Benedict)

 

I think so!

Mellen Benedict sure had a great explanation for Black Holes after his NDE:

(Mellen Benedict)
http://www.near-death.com/experiences/reincarnation04.html#a05

 

or like people used to do, send them to Sunday School

 

But a far better question might be how evolution made God the Creator happen???

If God was once a blob of fundamental energy composed of Super Strings and Super Energetic Matter and through a process along the lines of the Law of Complexity Consciousness the Creator got better and better and better and better at choreographing Big Bang events....then eventually God makes "others" kind of like how we may soon make androids...who are a lot smarter than our kids.....which could lead to problems that an intelligent person with an evangelical outlook on the world might word in a manner that most of you find terribly annoying if he were to be shown about this in a near death experience!?


http://www.christianforums.com/t7715259/

NDE of Dr. Richard Eby verifies old earth and gap theory.
I was impressed with the explanation given for the fall of Lucifer which would quite possibly fit with an earth that may well be 4.5 billion years old.

Apparently a lot happened between the original creation of the earth and the time when the repairing of the earth was made necessary due to an attempted coup d'etat by Lucifer and the angels who decided to follow him!!


.near-death.com/forum/nde/000/91.html

Dr. Richard Eby:
......

(Dr. Richard Eby, near-death.com)

 

And the Pope was very much in line with the theories of Dr. Chaim Henry Tejman, whose writings remind me much of how Dr. Albert Einstein would think!

I believe that the graphics and diagrams and photos will really give you cause to consider his ideas!


http://www.grandunifiedtheory.org.il/Book5/html/Quantum-living-creation.htm

 

What seems to key the change from species to actually tribal associations of the genealogy is that the inordinately long and impossible life spans of the 22 creatures named in the genealogy disappears after the "flood."
No one lives to ages of 900 years thereafter.

In the Genesis tale, Noah is an archaic Homo sapiens from which species evolved the three racial stocks of Modern Homo sapiens.
This happened 100,000 years before the 40,000 year "flood" starts,...
This corresponds with our own understanding today, in regard to the earliest appearance of Modern Homo sapiens. Allowing for the "flood" that just ended @ 10,000 years ago, the three racial stocks of Ham, Jephthah, and Seth, all would have evolved 150,000 years ago as WAS THE ACTUAL CASE.

Gen 5:32 And Noah, (an archaic type of Homo sapiens forebearer), was five hundred "years" old, (and the Flood will come when Noah is 600 "years" old: Gen 7:6) : and Noah begat Shem, (the Mongoloids), Ham, (the Negroids), and Japheth, (the Caucasians).

2) .... and, when the "flood" ends, around 10,000 BC, the Agricultural Age began.

20 And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard:




3) The really big correspondence between fact and scripture here, you failed to discredit yet.
The mention of Hybridization in Genesis is rather an uncanny and hard to dismiss reference to exactly what MUST have taken place before the "flood."
After the "flood," Neanderthals were not around to inter-bred.

Gen. 6:4 There were giants, (Homo Erectus of Methusaelian and Methuselahian kinds according to the bible), in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God, (that line of ascent which would not become extinct, Methuselahian links, through Seth, i.e.; Modern Homo Erectus), came in unto the daughters, (the sister species of Tubal-cain, Naamahians, a late stage Neanderthal type), of men, ("daughters" of the previous adaptation of the Methusaelian line of Cain, i.e.; Homo antecessor, derived through the line of Cain), and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men, (Neanderthals), which were of old, (powerful) men of renown (physical strength).




4) And, the second point in these two scenarios you never mentioned at all, that there WAS a mass EXTINCTION of all other humanoid creatures except Noah and his three Modern Homos.


Gen. 6:7 And the LORD, (the force behind the ever unfolding Reality of the Universe) said, I will destroy man (of these types and species) whom I have created (for the purpose to mentally model my image of Reality), destroy them, (of these types and species), from the face of the earth, (deeming them extinct); both (this species and kind of) man, and (his present abstract idea of) the beast (of the earth), and (his idea of) the creeping thing (of the earth), and (his idea of) the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them (in this process of evolution).


5) To add icing to THAT cake, both stories report the same moment in history for that event, if we will endure the point that "40 days is like 40,000 years" to God, he author of this tale.



2 Peter 3:8
But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

 

There are more than 22 names listed before the flood.

No it does not

No.

Anyone who has read the opening chapter to any college history of civilization knows that is not true

Another lie you keep trying to spread. There is no mention of hybridization. If you mean the 'men of renown" that came unto the daughters of men, their offspring were all killed off in the flood. That doesn't correspond to the Noah story. Noah is directly from the line of Seth. No "hybridization" took place in his bloodline, so we would not see Neanderthal dna in the population if the flood story was about that.

Epic fail.

Another lie, if you are referring to the out of Africa theory. Neanderthals WERE around after Homo sapiens left Africa.

In the biblical story, yes. Which destroys your premise that Neanderthal DNA proves there is a correspondence with sons of god/daughters of me.

In actual science, there is no mass extinction of all other "humanoids." There aint no correspondence.

Actually, neither story does.

 

Errrrr.....

No, the diagram based upon the scriptures shows dimensions 30X50X300 scale:



I enjoy and appreciate your attention to these details, and remind you that this is just another Bible book report, albeit modern and science based, but nevertheless intend to be placed before the Christians of the next generation as an option among the medieval archaic and evermore obsolete ideas presented by men like Kuther, Westley, Russell, Campbell, Smith, etc.

In your case, a non-believer, it matters little, but hopefully is seen as an improvement over the others.

 

Believer or non-believer both matter little.

If the dimensions you set up were true humans would be walking around with shrunken heads or would be over 8 feet tall.


The proportions you give make the human spine longer than the average human leg.

The whole notion is stupid.

 

That is not the diagram you posted earlier. It showed a 30x50x300 scale for the ENTIRE nervous system, and a 30x30x50 scale for the BRAIN ALONE. Both of which, as I've shown and as you have not refuted, are notably inaccurate.

 

Neither did Shem - Genesis 11:10 shows him living to 600 or possibly 602.
Arphaxad lived to nearly 500. That's obviously not a real human they're talking about either, so what does that 500 years refer to? Why arbitrarily draw the line at 600 years? And, as John noted, what about the other names before the flood?

Another entirely arbitrary distinction, presumably made in order to fit with the Meyers Konversations-Lexikon idea of 'race'. No doubt if the creator of this inane idea had been a proponent of Thomas Huxley's ideas we would have rationalisations of how the bible splits them into four groups: Xanthochroic, Mongoloid, Negroid, and Australioid. Or if he were keen on Coon's system we would have Caucasoid, Capoid, Congoid, Australoid and Mongoloid. Just more evidence of post-hoc rationalisation - the ideas of racial stocks are gross oversimplifications made by early biologists, why on earth would a divine book fit in with their simplistic pigeonholing?

I could continue, but as I said, you are clearly not amenable to logic in any way, and John has already dealt with most of it competently. Enjoy continuing in your delusions, as I'm sure you will.

 

That last sentence, in context, made me happy. ^_^ I friggin' hate Kent Hovind, and it's good to see that you don't buy his bull(*)(*)(*)(*).

Why not? If we have the answers to that question, then of course it should be taught in school. I mean, we learn in school that animals can feel pain, and that's very much an ethics-changing statement! Teaching evolution is akin to simply offering said evidence and ideas.

There is, and I'm not sure how to explain it to you. Maybe talkorigins can help.

Supporting evolution isn't really a bias. It's like supporting gravity - evolution is, for all intents and purposes, proven fact.

The problem with this, of course, is akin to the problem if you had said the same about gravity - it'd raise a few eyebrows, honestly.

Well...

 

?



An artist would tell you that the the skull is the size of your open hand from front to back, and about 2/3 the size of the hand across your forehead.
That would represent a scale of 50:30.

Using 50 as the length of a hand, from the top of your head to the tail bobe woukld be about six hands length, or 6X50 =300.

Pretty good symbolism...!

 

The answer depends on how "creationism" is defined, and on how it is being taught.

 

It should be taught in the sense that every church's "hypothesis" used to explain what the Bible says should be compared against the Truth, as science has so uncovered the Facts which correspond to that Truth.


There are seven basic Hypotheses that men have indoctrinated whole congregations with throughout the ages. These seven need be aired and examined as would any other hypothesis before comparing the facts found by Science with those statements:



Wikipedia:

The seven types of creationism:
1) Young Earth creationism
2) Old Earth creationism
3) Day-Age creationism
4) Progressive creationism
5) Gap creationism
6) Intelligent design
7) Theistic evolution


What teachers need focus on is the statements in Genesis, and show which of the hypotheses make good science correspondences and which flunk:


1) It is clear that the Universe DID have a beginning, 13.9 billion years ago.
(Gen 1:1)
http://kofh2u.tripod.com/id19.html

2) The hot spinning molten matter that was to coalesce into the planet Earth was without form:
http://kofh2u.tripod.com/id132.html

3) There were seven long Cosmic "days" since that Big Bang, which we call the seven cosmic/geological Eras
http://kofh2u.tripod.com/genesispic/Eraclock.jpg

4) A Cosmic Dark Age did precede that advent of let there be light to flood the cosmo:
(Gen 1:3-5)
http://kofh2u.tripod.com/DarkAge2.jpg

5) There was one ocean, once, where all the waters had been collected together
(Gen 1:9
http://kofh2u.tripod.com/genesispic/superocean.jpg

6) Pangea/Rodinia did actually confirm that the dry land appeared surrounded totally by water
(Gen 1:10
http://kofh2u.tripod.com/id123.html

7) The Plant kingdom did establish itself before the Animal kingdom
(Gen 1:11
http://kofh2u.tripod.com/id18.html

The Sun and the Moon and all the Stars were "MADE," given authority over circadian Earth Time as soon as life appeared:
http://kofh2u.tripod.com/id126.html

9) Man WAS the last step in the evolution of Dominant Life on earth.[/
(Gen 1:27)
http://kofh2u.tripod.com/genesispic/sethNoah.jpg

10) Man HAS managed to form a mental IMAGE of "Father Nature" by understanding of His Laws and creation.

Gen. 1:26 And God, (The Universal Force, the Macrocosmos), said, "Let us, (the Natural Laws), make man, (a conscious mind, to model us, the unfolding Universe, as a Microcosmos of his mind), in (order that) our image (might be modeled after our own orderly organization): and let him (that conscious mind,) have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."


Gen. 1:27 So God (The Universal Force) created man (an abstract mind in his own image, enabled to image The Universal Force, abstractly and mathematically), so created God (The Universal Force) him; male and female created he them.


11) Gen 5:2 says god called them, the man and his wife, the "Adamites," a species:

Gen 5:2 Male and female created he THEM; and blessed THEM, and called THEIR name Adam, (a species), in the day when THEY were created

12) There have been "22 now extinct humans" in the ascent of man, which compares in number with the listed genealogy from Adam thru Noah and his three "sons."
This corresponds with the three Racial Stocks of Modern Hom sapiens,...
Gen 5:32 And Noah, (an archaic type of Homo sapiens forebearer), was five hundred "years" old, (and the Flood will come when Noah is 600 "years" old: Gen 7:6) : and Noah begat Shem, (the Mongoloids), Ham, (the Negroids), and Japheth, (the Caucasians).

...as does the story tell us of inbreeding with Neanderthals just before the 40,000 year "flood-out-of-Africa" drove them all to Extinction, as stated in genesis.

Gen. 6:4 There were giants, (Homo Erectus of Methusaelian and Methuselahian kinds according to the bible), in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God, (that line of ascent which would not become extinct, Methuselahian links, through Seth, i.e.; Modern Homo Erectus), came in unto the daughters, (the sister species of Tubal-cain, Naamahians, a late stage Neanderthal type), of men, ("daughters" of the previous adaptation of the Methusaelian line of Cain, i.e.; Homo antecessor, derived through the line of Cain), and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men, (Neanderthals), which were of old, (powerful) men of renown (physical strength).

 

There are literally hundreds or thousands of different stories of "creation" that have been propagated throughout human history and censorship of this knowledge is simply catering to ignorance. Teaching about what the people of the world believed is about knowledge and there is nothing wrong with knowledge while there is a lot wrong with ignorance.

Where I would agree is if we were to limit our teaching to only providing one (or two different stories of "creation" as is found in the Bible) while censoring all of the other stories of creation that people developed that we know from history would be wrong. Censorship in such cases is nefarious as it would be used to propagate ignorance to promote a specific religion over all others historical religious beliefs. Teaching all of the "creationist" stories possible simply provides our children with knowledge and knowledge, as noted, is far superior to living in ignorance.

So to the question of whether should we just teach "Biblical Creationism" in our schools the answer would be no but if the question is whether we should teach all of the "creationist" stories proposed by religions over the history of mankind then the answer is yes. None is better or worse than any other and I believe that if we taught our children all of the stories of "creationism" they were soon realize how stupid and silly they all are. Of note some of the religious beliefs in creation have an "age-appropriate" requirement. We can't be teaching young children the Shinto creationist belief that a "God" had sexual intercourse with the Earth to create the Japanese Islands for example.

As has been noted by others though this has absolutely nothing to do with science, evolution, or scientific theories which has nothing to do with religious beliefs in creationism. Two are separate subjects but both worthy of being taught in our schools.

 

That is an improper way to deduce the actual dimensions of a skull. The true dimensions are not 3:5.

That is not the proportion of the length of spine to skull either.


It isn't pretty good symbolism. It's crap.

 

First off, another minor point but we're talking about the brain, which isn't exactly the same as the skull.

Artists use a number of shortcuts like the one you describe. They may be useful, but they are not necessarily accurate. You basically just admitted that the measurements are not correct, and used the 'artistic license' excuse. Which is fine as far as it goes, but art, being as subjective and open to interpretation as it is, is hardly a solid basis for interpretation of ultimate truths about life, the universe and everything.

I just tried it. It isn't even close. But then, the methodology is so woolly and off-the-cuff, and involves so many variables that I'm sure it would work for some people. On the mean, median, and mode, though, it's just plain wrong.

 

I more than agree with you to this point.

The churches will fight to stop the teaching, if Genesis is read and thoroughly comprehended as factual correct.
They will oippose teaching evolution in compliance withwhat Genesis actually say, while the atheists will also prohibit such teaching simply because it supports the Bible.

The organized power of Religion which is heavily invested in real estate, churches, schoold, hospitals will stop such education that disagrees with those men of the past who initiated the 12 major denominational christian organizations of the times.

What is really at stake is the value of Free Speech and the emergence of Truth in the midst of these proponents of their own system of things as they now exist.
The forces against Science corresponding with what is stated in Genesis are overwhelming and dead set against such a toppling of their apple carts.

 

Right.
Except the Theistic Evolution vreation story corresponds with the facts of Sceince.

That would destroy both the teachings and dogma of the organized religions and the atheists who denigrate the bible.
It would set in motion a Genesis that was directly taught as scientific fact.

Kids would see that the bible writers received the message that once "all the waters under heaven were collected together inot one place," and that in 1920, science found out about Pangea which supported this.

They would be taught that noo ne was certain if the Universe did ever have a beginning until 1940 when Hubble found evidence for the Big Bang Beginning. But the bible writers had been informed 3362 years prior by some divine source or another.

School kids would be taught thatvisiblelight did NOT occur until some 400 milliin years AFTER the "begining, " when finally some creative Force said the cosmos was colded down enough to let there be Light.

so on and so on....

Both the bible pharisees and the atheists would stop Theistic Evolution creationism.

 

Very very lame when compared with your previous attempt to undermine what i had posted about the Ark,...

... which isn't the Brain, but the Skull that holds it.

Later in the scriptures, the brain does become the focus of where God meets man.
It also is contained in an appropriately sized "box" to that scale:





The whole symbolism of the Torah repeats this refrain that the mind is the urim and thummim through which god reaches us.

 

You did notice that I said it was a MINOR point, right?

And yet, every image you post is of the brain. If you don't want to mislead people, then don't post things that are misleading.

What's more interesting, to me, is that you focus on what I even admitted was a minor point, and gloss over the fact that your figures are demonstrably bunk.

 

You erroneously say i keep posting the brain, but that is not so: