›
This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

Creation Science Fairs

HungryJoeHungryJoe
edited May 2008 in Politics
Has to be read to be believed.

Be sure to read their list of Science Fair Project Ideas.

Some of my favorites:
52. What was the weather like before the Flood?
53. Were all the animals friendly to man before the Flood? Idea: raise several baby animals like snake and mouse together to see if they remain friends as they are older.
54. Why do they live longer before the Flood?

58. Why did God create the moon to control the tides?

65. What affects skin color? Is one color better than another? What was God's purpose in this?

72. What is God made of?

74. What happens to eyes so you need glasses? Did God design them poorly?

80. Why did God make pests like bugs and mosquitoes?

83. Why do people believe in Evolution?
84. What events caused them to become evolutionists?

95. Are humans mammals? We thought they were made in God's image and not related to animals.

97. Why did God make birds to fly?
98. Were dinosaurs alive at the same time as humans?
Have a look at this as well.
«1

Comments

  • JasonJason
    edited May 2008
    My favorites:

    4. Statistical occurrence of giants, and midgets and dwarfs and giantism. Use Princess Flo, Goliath, and brothers.

    8. How much voltage or current can a human take before he is killed? Could do experiments on a plant.

    35. Why does the Bible say there is one glory of the sun, one glory of the moon, and one glory of the stars?

    105.What are aliens and are there really any in our world? see Lamentations 5:2, Eph 2:12, Heb 11:34.

    Silly home schoolers.

    I would like to propose another project idea:
    666. What kind of genetic mutations would have resulted from inbreeding enough generations for two humans to propagate an entire species?
    Post edited by Jason on
  • FunfetusFunfetus
    I was in home school for two years in junior high, and the only actual class I attended outside the home was bullshit just like this.
  • gomidoggomidog
    edited May 2008
    How much voltage or current can a human take before he is killed? Could do experiments on a plant.
    Raise several baby animals like snake and mouse together to see if they remain friends as they are older.

    This is mean and pointless! Those bible thumpers are horrible (plus that information is available if you do a little bit of #$%^&* research on the internet)

    What affects skin color? Is one color better than another? What was God's purpose in this?
    Better? WTF? Racist much?
    Post edited by gomidog on
  • HungryJoeHungryJoe
    This is the kind of "education" you get when you have no regulation or oversight.
  • VigaViga
    This makes me feel angry. Not even my old church friends were homeschooled this dumbshit.
  • jccjcc
    How much voltage or current can a human take before he is killed? Could do experiments on a plant.
    Raise several baby animals like snake and mouse together to see if they remain friends as they are older.

    This is mean and pointless! Those bible thumpers are horrible (plus that information is available if you do a little bit of #$%^&* research on the internet)
    The gold standard of confirmation is replication of experiments. I can't say I disagree with this part of the website.
    What affects skin color? Is one color better than another? What was God's purpose in this?
    Better? WTF? Racist much?
    Better to ask un-PC questions in the open than to hold unquestioned opinions in secret. Besides, one could make the argument that certain skin colors are worse to have than others depending on the amount of sun people get where they live. This is why light-skinned people in Australia have a higher risk for skin cancer, and dark-skinned people in the United Kingdom have a higher risk for rickets.
  • SparkybuzzedSparkybuzzed
    I really am more upset that people try and pass off this stuff as science. If this was some stupid Sunday school thing, it might be ignorable, but the idea that this is some variation of science? Unconscionable.
  • HungryJoeHungryJoe
    edited May 2008
    How much voltage or current can a human take before he is killed? Could do experiments on a plant.
    Raise several baby animals like snake and mouse together to see if they remain friends as they are older.

    This is mean and pointless! Those bible thumpers are horrible (plus that information is available if you do a little bit of #$%^&* research on the internet)
    The gold standard of confirmation is replication of experiments. I can't say I disagree with this part of the website.
    So, you think it would serve some experimental purpose to raise a mouse and a snake together to see if they would be "friends" like they might have been "before the Flood"? That's like doing an "experiment" to see if a frog can jump after its legs have been amputated.
    [O]ne could make the argument that certain skin colors are worse to have than others depending on the amount of sun people get where they live. This is why light-skinned people in Australia have a higher risk for skin cancer, and dark-skinned people in the United Kingdom have a higher risk for rickets.
    That's going pretty far afield for a justification. I think it's safe to say that is not the point they were trying to make.
    Post edited by HungryJoe on
  • TheWhaleSharkTheWhaleShark
    How much voltage or current can a human take before he is killed? Could do experiments on a plant.
    Raise several baby animals like snake and mouse together to see if they remain friends as they are older.

    This is mean and pointless! Those bible thumpers are horrible (plus that information is available if you do a little bit of #$%^&* research on the internet)
    The gold standard of confirmation is replication of experiments. I can't say I disagree with this part of the website.
    Not necessarily. I don't have to replicate Mendel's pea plant experiments to do research in genetics. When experiments have been repeated numerous other times by other people, and other data have been gathered by other people over a long enough time, you can draw conclusions. You personally do not always need to conduct an experiment. The way to go about it is to look at the research and data that other people have generated and the conclusions drawn, draw up a new hypothesis, and design an experiment to test it. In the case of the mouse and the snake, we have MOUNTAINS of empirical evidence and multitudes of observations that would give you a reasonable expectation of the outcome. This is not a question that should occur to someone who is engaging in rational science; any idiot will tell you that the snake will eat the mouse if given the opportunity.

    This is unnecessary experimentation.
  • jccjcc
    edited May 2008
    So, you think it would serve some experimental purpose to raise a mouse and a snake together to see if they would be "friends" like they might have been "before the Flood"?
    The purpose of the experiment would be to get the experimenter (most likely a punk kid) into the habit of experimenting, or if repeating an experiment, the habit of confirmation.

    So they try raising a corn snake and a baby mouse. That ends quickly and obviously. Ok, fine. Maybe someone else tries raising a garter snake and a baby mouse. Hmmm, they seem to be getting along ok... the garter snake only seems to want its fish... why do the two snakes act differently? This sort of observation and reflection is valuable.

    The biggest hurdle and risk with these kinds of experiments being done by Biblically-minded punk kids is that they will want to fuse their understanding of the two areas before they really understand either of them individually. The worst excesses of creationists can be traced back to this tendency of having only a very limited understanding of the Bible and a very limited understanding of science, and trying to fuse them together successfully.
    Post edited by jcc on
  • AndrewAndrew
    The worst excesses of creationists can be traced back to this tendancy of having only a very limited understanding of the Bible and a very limited understanding of science, and trying to fuse them together successfully.
    There is almost no way to successfully merge these two, especially with a full knowledge of the Bible and science. It's causes severe cognitive dissonance.
  • RymRym
    he purpose of the experiment would be to get the experimenter into the habit of experimenting, or if repeating an experiment, the habit of confirmation.
    I think the beef with these "experiments" is that they all beg the question. Furthermore, they're mostly ludicrous from any reasonable perspective.
  • HungryJoeHungryJoe
    edited May 2008
    So, you think it would serve some experimental purpose to raise a mouse and a snake together to see if they would be "friends" like they might have been "before the Flood"?
    The purpose of the experiment would be to get the experimenter (most likely a punk kid) into the habit of experimenting, or if repeating an experiment, the habit of confirmation.

    So they try raising a corn snake and a baby mouse. That ends quickly and obviously. Ok, fine. Maybe someone else tries raising a garter snake and a baby mouse. Hmmm, they seem to be getting along ok... the garter snake only seems to want its fish... why do the two snakes act differently? This sort of observation and reflection is valuable.
    As usual, you miss the point. They want the kiddies to use the results of the experiment to "prove" that the snake and the mouse were "friends" before the Flood. This is not useful or valuable experimentation.

    Why do you constantly defend these addlebrained fuckwits? Are you going to defend their idea that Man and Dinosaur lived at the same time as well?
    Post edited by HungryJoe on
  • HungryJoeHungryJoe
    edited May 2008
    @jcc - Why not just be straight with everyone here and admit that you're an Intelligent Design/Creationism supporter?
    Post edited by HungryJoe on
  • jccjcc
    edited May 2008
    @jcc - Why not just be straight with everyone here and admit that you're an Intelligent Design/Creationism supporter?
    I'm either agnostic or ignostic (or if ignostic is not accurate, whatever the appropriate term is for belief that the existence or non-existence of God/gods/godhood is irrelevant). I respect your right to question me on it, but my answer is, to the best of my self-knowledge, an accurate statement of my belief on the subject.

    Why must I be an intelligent designer if I'm willing to look into their points and their history? Why must I be a creationist if I take the unpopular role in debate?

    "The liberally educated person is one who is able to resist the easy and preferred answers not because he is obstinate but because he knows others worthy of consideration." -- Allan Bloom

    Besides, I like trolling you guys. :) A lot of interesting discussions come from it.
    Post edited by jcc on
  • Li_AkahiLi_Akahi
    Creationist Science Fair is such an oxymoron. I found that to be funny.
  • HungryJoeHungryJoe
    @jcc - Why not just be straight with everyone here and admit that you're an Intelligent Design/Creationism supporter?
    I'm either agnostic or ignostic. I respect your right to question me on it, but my answer is, to the best of my self-knowledge, an accurate statement of my belief on the subject.

    Why must I be an intelligent designer if I'm willing to look into their points and their history? Why must I be a creationist if I take the unpopular role in debate?

    "The liberally educated person is one who is able to resist the easy and preferred answers not because he is obstinate but because he knows others worthy of consideration."-- Allan Bloom
    So now you're the liberally educated one? I submit that you are either merely being obstinate, or that you think that ID is an idea worthy of consideration. If you think that ID is an idea worthy of cosideration, then you're an ID proponent.
  • JasonJason
    Creationism and Xenu are equally plausible. Neither is worthy of consideration.
  • jccjcc
    I submit that you are either merely being obstinate, or that you think that ID is an idea worthy of consideration. If you think that ID is an idea worthy of cosideration, then you're an ID proponent.
    Consideration is defined as "the process of giving careful thought to something." I think that most issues would benefit from consideration.
  • AndrewAndrew
    Consideration is defined as "the process of giving careful thought to something." I think that most issues would benefit from consideration.
    All the consideration has been done for creationism. There is no more reason to believe in it than to believe that the universe is geocentric.
  • HungryJoeHungryJoe
    edited May 2008
    "The liberally educated person is one who is able to resist the easy and preferred answers not because he is obstinate but because he knows others worthy of consideration."-- Allan Bloom
    Creationism and Xenu are equally plausible. Neither is worthy of consideration.
    People used the same sort of argument to defend pyramid power, UFOs, and ancient astronauts in the 70s. They would say, "You just need to have an open mind to believe in such things. If you're too narrow minded to admit that such things can and do exist, then you must not be very well educated."

    Well, there are lots of ideas that can be rejected out of hand. Creationism and Xenu are two excellent examples. Andrew is right. Creationism has had all the benefit it can glean from consideration. What about the geocentric theory of the universe, Mr. jcc? Are you willing to give it more consideration? What about pyramid power and ancient astronauts? Are you willing to give those ideas consideration as well?
    Post edited by HungryJoe on
  • TheWhaleSharkTheWhaleShark
    @jcc - Why not just be straight with everyone here and admit that you're an Intelligent Design/Creationism supporter?
    I'm either agnostic or ignostic. I respect your right to question me on it, but my answer is, to the best of my self-knowledge, an accurate statement of my belief on the subject.

    Why must I be an intelligent designer if I'm willing to look into their points and their history? Why must I be a creationist if I take the unpopular role in debate?

    "The liberally educated person is one who is able to resist the easy and preferred answers not because he is obstinate but because he knows others worthy of consideration."-- Allan Bloom
    Being contrary is not the same as being inquisitive or open-minded. Raising a snake and mouse in captivity is NOT worthy of consideration. We know what will happen, depending on the species of snake.

    If the question were something more akin to "What are the habitat differences between carnivorous and non-carnivorous snakes," or something like that, things would be different. As it is, this experimental idea is leading to the needless death of a mouse. Scientific ethics demand that we minimize that sort of thing; if you can observe it elsewhere, there's no need to go about killing a mouse. You can study the differences between wild snakes.

    I'm all about teaching these kids about science. Some of those science fair ideas actually seemed to be reasonable routes of inquiry, and I'm glad to see kids pursuing them. However, someone needs to tell them to consider the feasibility of conducting some of these things, and teach them about the ethics of conducting some kinds of experiments. We know that there are snakes that eat mice; why do you need to raise them side-by-side to see the end result. We know that there are lethal voltages of electricity; why do you want to determine the minimum fatal voltage level? When you start asking these questions, you force the inquirer to narrow their inquiry, and you can more readily figure out how to conduct a more properly controlled experiment.
  • HungryJoeHungryJoe
    edited May 2008
    DId you see those pictures of the kids who made models of Noah's Ark for their science fair project?
    Post edited by HungryJoe on
  • AndrewAndrew
    One of the judging criteria for the fair:
    5. Biblical Application/Illustration
    God's Word should be related to the project, either by a verse directly applicable to the topic, or by an analogy. Although younger students may need assistance in finding and applying the verse(s), the student should be able to explain it in his/her own words.

    Grades 7-125. Biblical Application/Illustration
    What does God's Word say about the problem? Each project must communicate in one of two ways: Application: Information that is usable in everyday life and relevant to the problem being considered. Illustration: Explanatory example, from Scripture, that parallels the given problem.
    It's nice to see we can make up our mind before we even do the experiments.
  • JasonJason
    edited May 2008
    “With the replica of the dinosaur bone we dug up, we have been successfully witnessing about God's judgment and God's mercy.”
    And here's the clincher:
    Tired of “ho hum” canned vacations? Want to do something very few people do? Want to find evidence that dinosaurs still live today? Want to do a “non-tourist” trip with guides who give a Biblical interpretation of God's creation. Then going on an Adventure Safarisvacation is just for you.
    Apparently, these folks believe a Nessie relative lives in Lake Manitoba.
    Post edited by Jason on
  • RailithRailith
    This seems like a scam to me. The site is basically a giant advertisement for a Christian hiking trip with some dude.
  • TheWhaleSharkTheWhaleShark
    I like this one:
    103.Where was the Garden of Eden? Is it around today?
    24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.
    Find me some cherubims and a giant flaming sword, kid. Let me know how that works out for you.
  • HungryJoeHungryJoe
    edited May 2008
    One of thejudging criteriafor the fair:
    5. Biblical Application/Illustration
    God's Word should be related to the project, either by a verse directly applicable to the topic, or by an analogy. Although younger students may need assistance in finding and applying the verse(s), the student should be able to explain it in his/her own words.

    Grades 7-125. Biblical Application/Illustration
    What does God's Word say about the problem? Each project must communicate in one of two ways: Application: Information that is usable in everyday life and relevant to the problem being considered. Illustration: Explanatory example, from Scripture, that parallels the given problem.
    It's nice to see we can make up our mind before we even do the experiments.
    They're really pushing to dress this up as science. I'll bet we see more, not less of this stuff as time goes on. One day, we'll have chemsitry lab write-ups that begin with "God wants these atoms to bind to form these particular molecules . . . "

    Prediction: One day we'll see people debating as to what bible verses are applicable to which computer programs. Further, we'll see people trying to fix computer problems through faith healing. Preposterous? How much more preposterous is it than believing that dinosaurs still exist?
    Post edited by HungryJoe on
  • JasonJason
    If you read the "article" on Noah's ark, you'll learn that apparently there was no rain at all until the flood, which also killed Methuselah. Oh, and Noah knew Adam and Eve's son.
  • AprecheApreche
    If you read the "article" on Noah's ark,you'll learn that apparently there was no rain at all until the flood, which also killed Methuselah. Oh, and Noah knew Adam and Eve's son.
    So there was no rain, but there were plants everywhere that require rain to live.
Sign In or Register to comment.