we are to far apart on what we think...to me, intelligent design could never work, the species interactions are just too complex for any being to make sucessfull....same with the universe, it's just to big to have been created by a being...

miss lu.... love that hawt pic, btw...you look like your famous

Edited again for attacking others.
This is NOT about religion..Op had a simple question.
What were you taught? And should the other be taught also?
NOT which is right or wrong.
OP offered her perspective as a Catholic STUDENT and asked
what other's religions thought about what was being taught.

soufie
Site Admin

I went to public school. As far as I remember, we were taught evolution, in history. It was a really small part of history class.

yep cat same here public schools taught science based so evolution and such whether in history or the life sciences classes. i can actually remember one teacher actually commenting on the lack of creationism time. we can't cover that here. it treads to close to religion

You have missed a few steps but essentially, yes.
Aerobic life evolved from anaerobic life.
It happened about the same time iron started to rust.


No they didn't.
They may have made measurements of a select number of species' DNA using known markers but they couldn't examine all species' DNA, examining all markers.
Refer to the Baloney detection kit.


I'm not sure what you mean by equally distant.





I refer you again to The Baloney Detection Kit. Particularly irrefutability and Occam's Razor.

The Tree of Life has basically 3 branches



Eubacteria - True Bacteria
Eukaryotes - Eukaryota, Organisms with nucleated cells
Archaea - Korarchaeota, Crenarchaeota, Euryarchaeota

A 4th branch but uncertain to individuality of branch is Viruses.

The reason why it is called a Tree of Life is because life branches off from a trunk like limbs of a tree.


Adaptation and mutation is evolution.
Evolution is change from one form to another.
Mutation of the pristine to adapt to changing circumstances.

I think what makes evolution so hard to accept is that religions teach that creation happened in six days and the world is only 6000 years old.
That man was placed here by God in the form of God, which cannot change.
The fossil record proves man entered after other creatures. It also proves that hominids changed over time.
It is significant that there are no modern day human fossils found beside dinosaurs. However it is also significant that early hominid fossils are found by mammoths and other extinct fauna in the fossil records. Its also significant that hominid change can be tracked thru the fossil record to our current form.
All which work within the Baloney Detection kit parameters.

the theory of intelligent design is itself implausible.
the notion that the universe is so complex and perfectly ordered is decried not only by the imperfection of our own little place within it but also by it's own notion that anything so complex and perfect would need it's own creator...begging the question of who or what is the creator of the creator?
and, who or what created that?
...ad infinitum

I went to public school and my parents sent me to ccd. I have my own ideas of how I feel and I'll keep it to myself.

Let's go all out and make everyone happy and teach flat Earth as well, since we'd be digressing by teaching about god in classrooms...

schools are for imparting knowledge.
why mix the perpetuation of beliefs with the training of rational thoughts, except as reference?

that don't make nooo sense.

The concept of a God or the big bang theory is all man made..I guess it all depends on what one believes and nothing more.I suppose it's all about just how great we are or believe we are in the whole scheme of things and yet the farther we move out into space the smaller we find ourselves becoming until we are microscopic,perhaps we are not really all that big in the first place

Perhaps we are microscopic and our entire universe is just a dust bunny under the couch of something greater than we have known and our existence could cease to be if that something greater was to merely lift the couch and and sweep us away..maybe our universe is nothing more than that dust bunny but because it is all we have known we think it is more than what it really is... as we are.... or maybe I have watched too many episodes of the Twilight Zone..

Believe it or not I understand your sentiments and might add to them concerning relativity.

On the relative size of the Universe and the concept of time specifically.
Our concept of time is relative to our size. I propose that we move at lightning speed compared to the Universe movement. A lifetime for us is a mere flash relative to the time duration of objects in the Universe at relative speed.
Stars last millions and billions of years.
Our star, the Sun will have a lifespan of around 10-12 billion years.
You can fit a million Earths inside our star.
Our Sun is microscopic compared to the biggest star and there are structures in the Universe that exceed that.



Our size is microscopic compared to the Earth.
The Earth is microscopic compared to the Sun.
The Sun is microscopic compared to VY Canis.

The Sun is merely 20 galactic years old.
It takes 225 million years for the Sun to orbit the Milky Way.
This means that human beings have not even existed for one galactic year.
Where we are right now in galactic orbit is merely 1 galactic year after dinosaurs first came to exist. Not since the went extinct but when they first started appearing.

Mankind has only been using science for roughly 200,000 years.
Modern science has only existed for roughly 5,000 years which also is when religion started.
Insignificant is an understatement.

That thought is indeed humbling and not at all unrealistic as far as I'm concerned. We can barely even get to Mars, so what the heck do we know, lol.
This concept was shown in -if memory serves- MiB, where they zoomed out, and ended up with this alien creature holding marbles in its hand, each marble being a galaxy.

Sometimes looking up at the heavens can help put problems in perspective, by thinking the way you outline. If you look at all the stars you see, then how worry about XYZ? It's so small, we are so small, in just that small part of what we can see.

Awed... thank you, Tom, also for the previous post with the Tree of Life. I never studied its meaning (Kabbalah), makes a lot more sense now!

Thanks, Cat!

Thanks, Eric :)
Amazing isn't it, that people within the same country -and likely in at least all first world countries- are taught completely opposing absolute truths that do not see eye to eye at all.

That means that a child could be taught the evolution way as absolute truth while another child same age going to a school 20 meters down the road can be taught creationism to be absolute truth.
That knowledge itself I find... not sure what the right word is. Daunting I think covers it

we we not actually taught it as an absolute truth crystal and the down the street teaching of creationism was at a parochial school tho there since i never attended i can't say if they ignored evolution totally

In an observational deduction this cross section is small compared to a world study. However, one can surmise a likelihood.
Have you posed the same question to non-dating sites?
I'm curious if you get the same results?


I agree but I was circa 1960s & 70s.
During that time period, opinion was mostly private and not up for public debate like it is now.


Evolution, biological evolution was taught in my science classes.
Social evolution was taught in my history/current events classes.
It was taught as a 'given'.
Any questions we had that pertained to religion were referred to our churches.
We were tested on the material taught in class and our beliefs were left to our religious teaching.
There was a distinct separation between the course material and our beliefs. Two different things entirely.

When my children were in school, they brought home their science homework.
I've read their textbooks.
At that time the Voyager Data was coming in pretty steady.
My children were taught things about the solar system that were old data/old thinking. I knew it to be inaccurate.
I helped my children disseminate between the correct answer to pass the test and the actual facts that conflicts with the correct answer.
It resulted in them passing the classes but also knowing the actual facts.

When I went to school we had to do class presentations.
Kids brought guns, bibles and all sorts of things into the classrooms to give their presentations.
There weren't protests, outcry or news coverage over it.
As a matter of fact, besides saving the whales and the Vietnam conflict, I don't remember any protesting or public outcry. I wasn't looking for it but nowadays you don't have to look for it, its in your face.

Vietnam war was the main movement back then,that's all the liberals had on their minds...they were better back then, but the Republicans had an open season on then at a couple of universities... Reagan had a few shot at Berkeley, I think, when he was governor of Cali, and a bunch more were killed in Ohio...the liberals weren't stupid back then, they knew the war was BS...