This is an archive of the mabination.com forums which were active from 2010 to 2018. You can not register, post or otherwise interact with the site other than browsing the content for historical purposes. The content is provided as-is, from the moment of the last backup taken of the database in 2019. Image and video embeds are disabled on purpose and represented textually since most of those links are dead.
To view other archive projects go to
https://archives.mabination.com
-
Intex wrote on 2010-09-03 22:51
Institute for Creation Research's two-year legal battle ends.
After two years, the Institute for Creation Research's battle with the Texas Higher Education Board is over, the Texas Tribune reports.
In 2008 the board denied the school's request for authority to offer a master's degree in science education. In June, a U.S. court ruled against the institute. CEO Henry Morris III discuss the matter in this month's newsletter.
Here's an excerpt:
"The message is clear: no science programs offered from a biblical creationist viewpoint are allowed. Even private schools will be judged by the restricted, secular practices of public schools, reinforced by the secular (read 'non-Christian') interpretations of the Establishment Clause that now dominate the legal system."
Here's the institute website
The Institute for Creation Research
Basically the site just says- This thing in nature is amazing, it just shows how amazing god is.
e.g.
Quote from Site Quote:
A small reflection of the power of our Creator is seen in the thousands of stars shining in the night sky. Galaxies are millions of stars packed close together. And billions of galaxies fill the universe. The amount of power displayed in the heavens is overwhelming, if we take the time to look up at night and think about it. This reveals God's power at the cosmic level.
-
Justified wrote on 2010-09-03 22:58
Wait, so people can
major in magic, but people who study a debatable form of science can't get a degree?
That's stupid.
-
Intex wrote on 2010-09-03 23:11
It's because
no science programs offered from a biblical creationist viewpoint are allowed
People are not supposed to teach Creationism in school.
-
Kazuni wrote on 2010-09-03 23:15
They shouldn't be giving out degrees for anything that can't be scientifically proven, imo.
-
EndlessDreams wrote on 2010-09-03 23:16
Quote from Justified;145502:
Wait, so people can major in magic, but people who study a debatable form of science can't get a degree?
That's stupid.
Majoring in "magic" is a plausible because "magic" is a type of performance art.
Creationism isn't science at all. It is religion. They should ask for a master degree in religion or something. Funny how they only talk about creationism under the Christian view as if it is the only one. What about the other 28349023894028390809 religious creationism views that differ from Christianity? Should they apply for a master of science degree as well?
-
Justified wrote on 2010-09-03 23:18
But I fail to see how "magic" is more useful/degree-worthy than teaching Creationism, whether or not Creationism should/n't be taught.
Edit:
Quote from EndlessDreams;145527:
Majoring in "magic" is a plausible because "magic" is a type of performance art.
Creationism isn't science at all. It is religion. They should ask for a master degree in religion or something. Funny how they only talk about creationism under the Christian view as if it is the only one. What about the other 28349023894028390809 religious creationism views that differ from Christianity? Should they apply for a master of science degree as well?
Creationism is a science (or at least : a psuedo-science). And they're only talking about the Christian view because that is what they're teaching. The point of a specific degree is to focus on one area, not cover all 213141231 areas within that subject. Other schools who choose to teach about other forms of Creationism can go through the same process.
-
EndlessDreams wrote on 2010-09-03 23:21
Quote from Justified;145532:
But I fail to see how "magic" is more useful/degree-worthy than teaching Creationism, whether or not Creationism should/n't be taught.
If you fail to see how "magic" is more useful/degree-worthy, then, you can say that to ALL performance arts, like Plays, any instrumental performance, or whatever. Also, just because you fail to see how (whatever degree) is worthy, doesn't make it unworthy. You might as well say a master degree in English is unworthy, but it doesn't make it unworthy.
People can actually see performance art, and learn it. Creationism actually has no (scientific) purpose except to prey on those who are weak to God-of-the-Gaps Argument.
-
Intex wrote on 2010-09-03 23:23
It would be fun to have a magician perform or teach my children magic.
I would petition to fire any teacher teaching creationism.
whether or not Creationism should/n't be taught.
This degree means they're more likely to be teaching in my school.
-
EndlessDreams wrote on 2010-09-03 23:25
Quote from Justified;145532:
Creationism is a science (or at least : a psuedo-science). And they're only talking about the Christian view because that is what they're teaching. The point of a specific degree is to focus on one area, not cover all 213141231 areas within that subject. Other schools who choose to teach about other forms of Creationism can go through the same process.
You missed the point completely.
Psuedo-science =/= Science.
Hence, it doesn't deserve a Master of Science degree. They should ask for a Religion Master degree instead.
-
Justified wrote on 2010-09-03 23:30
Quote from EndlessDreams;145534:
If you fail to see how "magic" is more useful/degree-worthy, then, you can say that to ALL performance arts, like Plays, any instrumental performance, or whatever. Also, just because you fail to see how (whatever degree) is worthy, doesn't make it unworthy. You might as well say a master degree in English is unworthy, but it doesn't make it unworthy.
People can actually see performance art, and learn it. Creationism actually has no (scientific) purpose except to prey on those who are weak to God-of-the-Gaps Argument.
Did I say "magic" was unworthy, or that my opinion makes it so? No. I asked how "magic" is more worthy than religious Creationism.
People can learn Creationism too. Likewise, all performance arts have no (scientific) purpose. In that way, they are the same as religion. They both serve as forms of entertainment/guidance for use to understand/enjoy our lives, as opposed to a possibly mundane/nihilistic one.
Also, the degree is for "Science Education" which would make it a teaching degree. Not a science degree.
-
Beepuke wrote on 2010-09-03 23:35
There's a great difference in Bachelor of Magic and Master of Science in Creationism. MS and BS implies that there is rigorous research involved in the educational process. For instance, the difference between a BA in Cellular and Molecular Biology and a BS in the same is the amount of required upper level electives and at least 2 semesters worth of research. I don't see how a Master of Science can be granted to something that doesn't involve any research at all, but entirely on interpretation of primary and secondary texts. I'm sure a Master of Arts would be possible in Creationism, just like in it's available in Theology, but I just don't see how a Master of Science would be applicable to the same.
For performance arts, I'm sure there is no Master of Science granted, unless they were delving deeply into acoustics and theory. It would be more likely Master of Fine Art degrees that are handed out.
-
EndlessDreams wrote on 2010-09-03 23:50
Quote from Justified;145538:
Did I say "magic" was unworthy, or that my opinion makes it so? No. I asked how "magic" is more worthy than religious Creationism.
People can learn Creationism too. Likewise, all performance arts have no (scientific) purpose. In that way, they are the same as religion. They both serve as forms of entertainment/guidance for use to understand/enjoy our lives, as opposed to a possibly mundane/nihilistic one.
Also, the degree is for "Science Education" which would make it a teaching degree. Not a science degree.
lol, you missed the point again. When did I say Performance Arts is science? It is clearly not science. Like Beepuke says, it will have its own master of fine arts/performance art degree. That type of degree would not allow it to become a science.
Science Education would imply that whatever subject is science. You should try reading both the words "Science" and "Education" instead of just "Education". It kind of helps.
A science education degree would enable a person to teach something as science. Creationism is clearly not science. It is psuedo-science, which isn't a science. Performance arts are not the same thing as religion. You can actually see or hear performance arts, but you can't see/hear religion the same way. You don't need faith to sense performance arts, but you need faith for religion.
Your mundane part of your opinion doesn't support the rest of your argument. One can say that religion (or anything) itself is pretty mundane, but it doesn't help any arguments at all.
-
Justified wrote on 2010-09-04 00:32
I don't know where you're getting this "Arts = Science" impression, since my point is that teaching Creationism should be worthy of a teaching degree if the coursework follows requirements, just like any other degree (ie: magic) does. If it had to be classified into an area of research, then yes it would fall into the science category just because it covers the same material as something like the Big Bang Theory or evolution.
And since"lol you missed the point" about the mundane bit, I was comparing the two in that they're both similar and yet only one gets a degree.
Out of curiosity, what area does Astrology fall under? This seems to fall under the same branch.
-
Beepuke wrote on 2010-09-04 02:05
Well, I would say that the degree in magic is something that's clearly not "magic." No one thinks that degree is going to make him a wizard like Harry Potter or something ridiculous. His degree in magic is probably (yeah, I know I'm mostly just guessing) focused on showmanship, developing new illusions, and the technical aspects of 'magic'. I imagine his thesis could be on how the human mind reacts to magic and illusions, or something similar. What I'm trying to say that a degree in magic is perfectly defensible - I can see how he could do research, attend course electives, etc.
I just don't see how you could get a Master's degree in science education while studying creationism. I'm sorry but that's just .. not related to science at all. Maybe the excerpt that Intex quoted from the website is misleading but all they seem to be advocating is blindly attaching religious views to established scientific viewpoints. Why yes, stars! Billions of them! They must be from God, and must show the glory of God. Reads too much like propaganda to me.
-
Spartaaaaa wrote on 2010-09-04 11:39
So teaching that God created everything is not science but teaching that we all evolved from rocks and sea water three billion years ago somehow is? What kind of sense is that supposed to make?