Video instructions and help with filling out and completing Are Form 8453 S Topic

Instructions and Help about Are Form 8453 S Topic

I think our children have more robust intelligence in and questioning to be able to cope with looking at all the different theories that are out there looking at all the different theories that are out there I agree I wish there was time for children to learn all the different theories they were shaped by extraordinary people who decided to observe the Stars The Rock's life heat light and matter with open minds they made conclusions based on evidence not their religious beliefs surely the knowledge they've handed down to us will never be kept from our children we have a revelation from one who says I know everything I've always been there here's what happened in the past so when we take that revelation put on our set of glasses and we look at the evidence we can say our now I understand fossils couldn't afford before sin there was no death before sin there was a global flood that connects to geology what is the age of the earth when did the creation actually occur and of course we're going to go to the Bible how we make advances in science is being open to all different perspectives and that's all that we're calling for let's qualify that fundamentalists don't advocate teaching all of the thousands of different perspectives that are out there like the idea that the earth is expanding or that aliens from another planet help build the pyramids what they want is to be able to teach just one different perspective and the fundamentalist lobby is running a well targeted campaign to convince parents not just in the United States but also in other countries of two things but creation science and intelligent design our science and that there's a real debate about our origins going on within the scientific community and let's face it most people don't know that much about science or about what goes on within the scientific community so the first thing to recognize and to be honest about is that this has nothing to do with science we take that revelation put on our set of glasses as I explained in the last video the scientific method made easy starting with a conclusion and then looking for the evidence afterwards shatters the first golden rule of science it's not even the way our courts operate if you know your conclusion advanced why even bother looking at the evidence any kind of scientific research becomes futile this is so obvious even to non-scientists that advocates of creation science soon realized it wasn't a great way to break into the science curriculum so the label was dropped in favor of something that was much vaguer but sounded more thoughtful intelligent design takes a simple two-step approach find something complicated that we don't yet understand and conclude that because we don't understand it the best explanation is to assume the work of an invisible being or to put it in a way that sounds a little more scientific an intelligent designer in fact researchers who've applied the scientific method to these supposedly intractable problems have discovered their origins consistent with what we know and understand even for things that seem to be very unintelligent Lee designed but even if they hadn't this leap from problem to conclusion is not how science works as we saw in the last video on the scientific method real scientists investigate things we don't understand however complicated until they come up with a workable hypothesis based on that hypothesis they then make a prediction that's rigorously tested only when a hypothesis has been successfully tested can a conclusion be reached advocates of intelligent design aren't prepared to make predictions let alone test them so it's not science maybe not even a hypothesis because intelligent design doesn't explain the process by which organisms were designed and made it would be just as useful to say it all happen by magic so the two sides of this supposed debate are beginning to look decidedly unequal the theory of intelligent design isn't a theory at all it's an untested idea and we never include untested ideas in the school science curriculum not only because they haven't been reviewed or verified or derived by the scientific method but because there are so many untested ideas out there they'd fill the entire science curriculum as for the notion that the scientific community is divided okay on one side we have biologists including many Christian Muslim Jewish and Hindu biologists who accept evolution and on the other side we have biologists who believe in intelligent design so the scientific community isn't divided over this question at all there's an overwhelming consensus the people who are calling for their ideas to be injected into the science curriculum are outside the scientific community and are happy to display a breath take ignorance of the subject they're tackling somehow that my family grow we produce swim God somehow this happened if Ben Stein is going to disagree with the theory of evolution at least he has to understand how it works people like Stein may have fallen asleep in biology class but there's no excuse for denying our children a decent science education insisting instead that they dumbed down to our level of ignorance and should we really be telling children that if they come up against a problem as scientists they shouldn't try to investigate or resolve it it's okay to assume it's the work of an invisible being how far would that have got us in the last 500 years in the 16th century this was a key piece of evidence for intelligent design there was simply no way to explain it how could each color know where it had to go in the rainbow and how did they all know how to form a perfect semicircle together the only way these colors could be put into such a perfect and regular pattern

100%
Loading, please wait...