We're giving the government a reason to regulate homeschooling

It depends on the level of detail to which you want to go. At the basic level, the earth orbits the sun, as do all the planets. The moon and the earth are actually a double planet, so they orbit each other (which is why there are two high tides every day and not just one). Yes, the other planets affect one another, but to a very minor extent. It's measurable, but it's very tiny. (This is how scientists predicted Pluto before ever spotting it.)

Relativity provides an explanation for gravity. Basically, mass "bends" space. Imagine a board with indentations along which you roll a marble. It will almost fall in one indentation, then in another, and so on. The indentations cause it to change speed and direction as it moves along the board. This is exactly how gravity works. The mass of the sun bends space so that the earth "falls" toward that "indentation".

No one, however, is saying that the earth is fixed and cannot be moved. No one is saying that the sun and planets rotate around the earth. They are pointing out that, when you look at the details, it's not as simple as Newtonian physics implied. It's often in the details that we learn new things.

See - you raise a physics topic, and I can't stop myself!

Did you know, by the way, that the latest models for the "Big Bang" imply that our space-time fabric exploded into existence from virtually nothing in a split second? This is not saying that space existed and matter exploded; space-time itself was created in less than the twinkling of an eye.

 

This is a common theme in the teaching of science. In high school, we're taught that an atom has a nucleus and that electrons orbit that nucleus. When they jump between orbits, they give out light - which is how we can detect the presence of specific elements in the stars. Later, we're told that's all wrong! Electrons don't orbit the nucleus at all. Instead, electrons inhabit various shapes, and there's a certain probability of being in each part of that shape. Later on again, we're told that this is wrong too! Electrons are actually defined by wave functions, and everything depends on probability (hence the field of quantum mechanics). Indeed, we can never know the exact position and momentum of an electron.

In a sense, we're deceiving people in high school science - which is the level most people reach. On the other hand, no one in high school would understand wave functions or the math needed to define them. So, there's a reason for doing it this way, but it is important to realize that much of what is taught in high school is actually wrong. It's an approximation at a level appropriate for high-schoolers.

It's rather like another topic that came up a while ago: No science is exact, and no experiment is exactly repeatable. Results are accurate within a range, but the very basis of our world is probabilistic. Results are meaningless without quoting error ranges.

 

I'm on a roll now!

My PhD research was in a field known as fine particle magnetism. Fine particle magnets are very small particles of ferromagnetic material (such as cobalt or magnetite). They are so small that they are "single domains." This means that all magnetic moments in the particle point in the same direction, making it as strongly magnetic as it could possibly be. If these particles are suspended in a liquid, the liquid as a whole behaves rather like a liquid magnet. This is fascinating because no liquid in nature is magnetic, but these magnetic fluids exhibit the behavior they would have. They have some very weird properties, and we used to love showing visitors and undergrads these things. For example, here's what happens if you put a watchglass of this fluid over a magnet.

Anyway, the point I wanted to make is that magnetic fluids of this type have been found in various creatures, including the homing pigeon. This is why, after driving hundreds of miles with your pigeon, it can immediately fly home. It has this inbuilt magnet in its brain, and flying home is no problem! Looking at fossils, it's clear that the earth's magnetic field has flipped a few times. You can imagine the confusion this caused in the animal kingdom!

 

Personally, I think the threat of "discord" is all too often used as a weapon against those who don't exactly fit into the accepted norm or agree with the concensus. With that being said, I don't want to be the one sowing discord. I think its best if I bow out of this discussion and the Spot for a while. I'm seeing way to much "hit man" action for my taste and not enough "tenderheartedness".
Until next time...
Marty

 

Never said it was you causing discord. I just see the discord Seeking mentioned is occurring. Let's not forget when you came into this thread you never commented on the discussion as much scold Seeking for whatever behavior you suspected was un-Christlike. There is no "hit man" action here...we are all discussing something. Sorry if you misinterpreted tone...keep in mind that it's hard to interpret tone or intention in black and white words.

Again, it's NOT you causing discord. You have said a few things that made me think twice and challenged me. I welcome that. I just think it's easy to see how discord gets started on these topics. I don't think Seeking is causing discord either. I just think it's too easy for discord to happen. Especially when one interprets posts as hostile or negative when the other does not or does not have that intention.

This topic is emotional and can all too easily be misunderstood...that was my only point...yes I agreed with Seeking but that was not me siding with her (although I do agree with her) against anyone. I don't disagree entirely with you...I think you both have good points of view. I just think you both come from different angles.

Yes, saying that something causes discord can be an excuse. However, the mere fact that two disagree and continue on that road with no positive outcome does define discord. That is not the fault of you or her or anyone here. That is just different angles and points of view colliding.

Please do not think I was talking to you directly.

 

Very cool stuff. Although, I tend to disagree somewhat on the idea that no liquid in nature is magnetic. It may not be magnetic in that it has no potential to be as a magnet, but even pure water it most definitely is influenced by magnetics.

Actually, research reveals that the homing pigeon uses its vision first, only when the route is completely unknown by sight or it is blinded do the birds use the magnetic patterns and they use very specific patterns when they fly that way also. In addition, the majority of people can point out magnetic north when all other sensory stimulation is suppressed as well.

Or the earth's magnetic poles never actually flipped, but what is seen is one result of the Creation process, but then again....you will believe what you choose to believe on that issue.

 

Marty, - Please don't run away. I love to discuss various points of view about anything!

(Not that I know that much, but reading the different opinions helps me define my own, and when I get up enough nerve to present something which differs from another post, it's educational to see that examined also. Every bit of this thread has been fascinating, including your and SeekingmyLord's discussions. Very thought provoking. If you do decide you need a break, then accept our thanks for sharing as much as you have, anyway.)

 

Sure did!

Then the rest was finished within the week!

 

Ava Rose,
I didn't think you were talking about me.
I am VERY sensititve to this type of spiritual sabotage, as I see it.
When I was a young Christian in my teens, I joined a church that turned out to be extremely good at this type of thing.
They were great at dropping one-liners which insinuated that whoever they were talking about was in the wrong. If any attempt was made to discuss or question a topic they felt was "unworthy", the person making the inquirery was verbally "burned at the stake" for being a heretic. No reasonable discussion could ever take place because anything you said was twisted and turned against you. Or they would change what they said to fit their needs. Any scripture you may quote was immediately countered or you were told your interpretation was in error. Because of this type of spiritual sabotage, I stepped away from the church and very nearly from God.
And if all else fail, the marvelous "causing discord" was trotted out to shut you up.
It took a great many years to out get over the wounds and scars caused by that nonsence.
I'm not sure if Seeking was playing that type of game. However, with all the one-liners and zingy comments, it did come across that way to me. And if it did come across that way to me it is possible that it also did to others.
If you think I was being too harsh in my "scolding" then I apologize. I certainly don't want to be accussed of going into attack mode. How we are viewed by others very much affects our witness and how others see Christ. If I muddied His name then I am truely sorry.
Marty

 

I'm a Christian, and I believe in the Big Bang. God spoke, and BANG! there it was!

 

Marty: I just think reading things in black and white has its disadvantages. After what you just said..I understand why you thought what you did. I can see you are very concerned about how your represent Christ..I admire that. You speak with purpose and in a way that strives to please the Lord and present Him in a good light. I will say I did think for a sec that you were a bit hard....but nothing you said was insulting. We all have our own backgrounds and experiences that determine how we interpret what we read. I am not always very good at remembering first who I represent. I tend to give a zinger at times myself....then stand firm that if I spoke truth and it cuts than it cuts. Well, sometimes we speak in love and it cuts..that happens. However, we would never try to make it cut, just because we think we have the answer. I came from a background of being VERY sarcastic. Sometimes that bleeds over. Reading your posts helps me learn to remember to temper all things with a love for Christ first and not talk filled with self righteous pride. I suppose I may have thought you were a bit hard because your words were convicting on my harsh tongue. Not that I felt I was harsh here...but my tongue has always been my weakness. I tend to use my boldness to prove a point...but sometimes lack grace. You seem to want to advocate the love of Christ as to not offend or make others feel as you once did. Sometimes those things collide. Believe me, I could learn from you.

 

Why did you not just ask me?

If I were of the mindset to play games in a genuine effort to shut someone down, I would use much stronger tactics. No, I am pretty much as I said I am. I believe that everyone will believe as they choose to believe. I am not even trying to convince people to believe anything in particular, which has frustrated others in this thread also.

The ironic thing is that I see this topic as doing the same thing as you are suggesting. Not that Steve even meant to put it this way, but if I were sensitive to what he wrote, I could easily choose to see that young earth creationists are being warned that if we don't shut up and just comply with the mainstream in teaching evolution as fact, we are going to cause the downfall of homeschooling. Not only did he bring up a particularly touchy subject within Christianity (and some other religions also) but he targeted Christians who believe in young earth creation and that could be quite offensive to them. It is inevitable that it will cause discord, disagreement, dissension, or whatever you would prefer to call it.

It really does go both ways. The only difference is our perspectives.

 

:angel:

Love the posts, ladies!

 

Funny, I was just talking to a friend yesterday about the Body of Christ and Christian's influence on the world today. Christians are not united in the true belief of the saving blood of Christ but get caught up in dissension and small details. I am chief to this. Those who seek to destroy are far better organized and united than we are. Yet, that's the devil's plan...to unite his own and divide God's own. We need to focus on the main truth of the saving blood of Christ. I do think we should still discuss topics such as these and learn all we can. I just think we need to do so as our Father would have it done. Meaning...if one appears to offend...ask her what she meant or what is driving her before falling back on past memories and perspectives that may have nothing to do with the current conversation. We all do this..it's natural. No accusations here. Just some thoughts.

 

With all due respect Seeking, I did. See post #153. I pointed out that you had misquoted scripture. You replied the scripture had been taken out of contect but you didn't address my questions.
Marty

 

You did not directly ask me if I was "playing that type of game." You asked me about assumptions you assumed I made and, actually I did answer those questions at Post #155 But if you prefer, let's take a look point by point:

True. However, I am wondering now--although it is a minor point, probably--how do you live at peace with all men without making peace with all men?

As far as it depends on "you," as the scripture reads.

I am not assuming. Discord in my dictionary has the meaning of "lack of agreement." He knew there would be lack of agreement in regards to the subject.

Don't you think this is a a pretty gloomy warning for not being a scare tactic?

I answered this previously in Post #155, but again I am not assuming everyone who wishes to live in peace is motivated by fear to do so.

I did not assume everyone who would rather not draw attention to themselves do it out of fear. Post #155

I cannot answer this because I do not feel it was wrong as I stated in Post #155 and then we got into the topic of what peace was, remember?

Let's not go in more circles on this, please.

I apologize for taking this off-topic but I feel it worth explaining here. I question the purpose to bring up those things which are know to add to dissension among believers particularly when these arguments cannot/will not end in consensus and have no eternal value. The topic is, for those who believe in creationism, a matter of religious principle on which they will not bend even to the threat of more government regulation. Not only does this topic bring that to light, but it can also add to the resentment between homeschoolers themselves. I can imagine at least some of the evolutionists feel that if government steps in, it will be due to the erred ways of those religiously fanatic creationists, which is what Steve has suggested although without the flowery adjectives.

 

I am wondering about the passage in the Bible where God says we have to have the faith of a child to enter Heaven:

Luke 18:17 (New King James Version)

17 Assuredly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child will by no means enter it."

I cannot say for sure exactly what this means, but could it possibly address this issue.
If we question and research and "find" things contrary to God's Word are we receiving the kingdom of God as a child? I don't think so. Children believe things their heavenly Father tells them. God says in His word that He created man in His image, but not any other animal.

As far as this being a dividing issue---yes, it is, but if we remember to respect people and stand firm at the same time then we can handle this without harm. I obviously have strong opinions, and I will never agree with some people, but then again they will probably never agree with me. C'est la vie. (I don't know how to spell that..)

 

Then maybe you should offer him the same curtisy you said I didn't offer you. Maybe you should ask him directly if that was his purpose instead of using words like "scare tactic" and "striving to cause".

Marty

 

I did, Marty. Read through the posts.

 

I want to bring up something else that might just lighten the impact of the video Steve had a link to.

For the most part everyone has one set of DNA, right? In fact, DNA evidence is used to convict or exonerate people charged with crimes. In fact, DNA is used to prove if someone is the son/daughter of a mother/father.

But, what if a mother has a baby and then at a later date it is "proven" that the child is not hers. What? How can that be? It has happened. Women have been "proven" not to be the mother of their child through DNA evidence. I say proven, but in actuality they were not proven not to be the mother, but the DNA "showed" it. It is possible for one person to have two sets of DNA. It is a condition called Chimera. Before this condition was known people would no doubt believe that a person could not be the mother if the DNA didn't match. There would be no other explanation.

Just like the video--The fused chromosome supposedly "proves" we have common anscetors. No it doesn't, it may appear that way, but the explanation may be something we haven't even discovered yet.

In the end, I will believe that God created man as a human being and that we started out that way.