Abiogenesis

Originally posted by XanthosNZ
Scientific Method: A method of discovering knowledge based in making falsifiable predictions, testing them empirically, and preferring the simplest explanation that fits the known data.

Observation? 😕

Ever heard of testing a hypothesis by means of observation and experimentation?

Originally posted by Starrman
And you would do the same if you take that sentence and replace TOE with creationism?

I would most definately teach that Creation requires a belief in God.

Originally posted by dj2becker
I would most definately teach that Creation requires a belief in God.

And so does not have any place in a science lesson?

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
I'm not debating evolution, I'm sincerely interested in what science you consider worth teaching. That you wouldn't teach evolution is a given.

OK. I'll have to think about this. I'll get back to you.

Originally posted by dj2becker
when it comes to origins I feel that the TOE does sufficiently give all the answers.

You converted! Halellujah!

Originally posted by Starrman
And so does not have any place in a science lesson?

I believe that "Science" in essence was founded by Bible believing Christians. I believe that the only way that anyone can truly understand Science is by looking at it from a Biblical perspective.


See: http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/science.shtml

Originally posted by dj2becker
Ever heard of testing a hypothesis by means of observation and experimentation?

What if we take the theory and assume that it's true. Then we look at what effects that would have on things we can observe. A falsifiable prediction. Then we test if that prediction is true. If the prediction isn't then the theory needs to be adjusted. If the prediction is then we have taken a step towards verifying the theory.

If every prediction we make is true then we may (depending on the number of predictions we have made) be able to call our theory a Theory.

Originally posted by telerion
You converted! Halellujah!

See the edited version 🙂

Originally posted by dj2becker
See the edited version 🙂

You display the kind of excellent scholarship that would take you far at a place like AIG or the Discovery Institute.

Originally posted by XanthosNZ
What if we take the theory and assume that it's true. Then we look at what effects that would have on things we can observe. A falsifiable prediction. Then we test if that prediction is true. If the prediction isn't then the theory needs to be adjusted. If the prediction is then we have taken a step towards verifying the theory.

If every prediction we ...[text shortened]... e may (depending on the number of predictions we have made) be able to call our theory a Theory.

That is exactly my problem with the TOE. I believe the TOE is not falsifiable. But that is a totally different topic for debate.

edit: here's am interesting site on the topic:
http://acs.ucsd.edu/~idea/falsify.htm

Originally posted by dj2becker
I believe that "Science" in essence was founded by Bible believing Christians. I believe that the only way that anyone can truly understand Science is by looking at it from a Biblical perspective.


See: http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/science.shtml

I am seriously disturbed by the fact that you may end up infiltrating education under the guise of certified training and then filling eager minds with this.

Originally posted by Starrman
I am seriously disturbed by the fact that you may end up infiltrating education under the guise of certified training and then filling eager minds with this.

I will most definately not force anything on the kids. I will be as objective as possible. In the end they will decide for themselves.

Originally posted by dj2becker
I will most definately not force anything on the kids. I will be as objective as possible. In the end they will decide for themselves.

That is plain rubbish and you know it. You have already revealed that you:

1) Beleive that you cannot understand science without god: I believe that "Science" in essence was founded by Bible believing Christians. I believe that the only way that anyone can truly understand Science is by looking at it from a Biblical perspective.

2) Would do what you intended and not what the syllabus required of you: I would most definately not tell the kids that Evolution is a fact, if I were told to do so...

Tell me, how are these two statements condusive to an objective teaching role?

Originally posted by Starrman
That is plain rubbish and you know it. You have already revealed that you:

1) Beleive that you cannot understand science without god: I believe that "Science" in essence was founded by Bible believing Christians. I believe that the only way that anyone can truly understand Science is by looking at it from a Biblical perspective.

2) Would do ...[text shortened]... o do so...[/i]

Tell me, how are these two statements condusive to an objective teaching role?

1) Beleive that you cannot understand science without god: I believe that "Science" in essence was founded by Bible believing Christians. I believe that the only way that anyone can truly understand Science is by looking at it from a Biblical perspective.

I said that is what I believe. If it were a Christian school then that is what I would teach. If it were a government school and I taught what I believed then I would loose my job. Didn't you know that the new religion in schools is secular humanism?

2) Would do what you intended and not what the syllabus required of you: I would most definately not tell the kids that Evolution is a fact, if I were told to do so...

Do you think it would be objective of me to teach Evolution as a fact?

Originally posted by dj2becker
I believe that "Science" in essence was founded by Bible believing Christians. I believe that the only way that anyone can truly understand Science is by looking at it from a Biblical perspective.


See: http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/science.shtml

Science was founded by Christians? Then what of the early Greek scientists and mathematicians? (Mathematics being the root of all science.) or the ancient Chinese scientists and astronomers? Christians may indeed be responsible for the rebirth of European science; or the study of science in Christian cultures, but I think it is a might strong to say that Christians founded science--especially, "Bible-believing" Christians, since scientific progress was being made before the book we now know as the Bible was completed.