Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (93771)	1/16/2005 10:54:12 AM
From: Tom C	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

The divide between scientists and "creationists" is not nearly so wide as a lot of people imagine. I doubt that. Sure, Biologists can believe in God and not see a conflict between science and their religious beliefs, but injecting a non-scientific believe system into what is supposed to be science class should rightfully cause uproar. It is not science. Discussing creationism in a science class is nothing more then a Christian-right version of political correctness.

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (93771)	1/16/2005 9:01:02 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

I see no inherent conflicts between natural selection and religious belief unless one is firmly wedded to (an unnecessary) literal view of the early sections of the Bible. Therefore I see no value in disputing natural selection via "creation science" - which does seem to me to be just a way of defending the literality of the first few chapters of Genesis. So I'm not really interested in that argument. I see such things as the Big Bang theory (now firmly established among scientists) and Intelligent Design (which may some day be as well established) as being very different from "creation science" though.