quaist

KANSAS CITY, KS—As the debate over the teaching of evolution in public schools continues, a new controversy over the science curriculum arose Monday in this embattled Midwestern state. Scientists from the Evangelical Center For Faith-Based Reasoning are now asserting that the long-held "theory of gravity" is flawed, and they have responded to it with a new theory of Intelligent Falling.

Enlarge ImageEvangelical

Rev. Gabriel Burdett explains Intelligent Falling.

"Things fall not because they are acted upon by some gravitational force, but because a higher intelligence, 'God' if you will, is pushing them down," said Gabriel Burdett, who holds degrees in education, applied Scripture, and physics from Oral Roberts University.

Burdett added: "Gravity—which is taught to our children as a law—is founded on great gaps in understanding. The laws predict the mutual force between all bodies of mass, but they cannot explain that force. Isaac Newton himself said, 'I suspect that my theories may all depend upon a force for which philosophers have searched all of nature in vain.' Of course, he is alluding to a higher power."

Founded in 1987, the ECFR is the world's leading institution of evangelical physics, a branch of physics based on literal interpretation of the Bible.

According to the ECFR paper published simultaneously this week in the International Journal Of Science and the adolescent magazine God's Word For Teens!, there are many phenomena that cannot be explained by secular gravity alone, including such mysteries as how angels fly, how Jesus ascended into Heaven, and how Satan fell when cast out of Paradise.

The ECFR, in conjunction with the Christian Coalition and other Christian conservative action groups, is calling for public-school curriculums to give equal time to the Intelligent Falling theory. They insist they are not asking that the theory of gravity be banned from schools, but only that students be offered both sides of the issue "so they can make an informed decision."

"We just want the best possible education for Kansas' kids," Burdett said.

Proponents of Intelligent Falling assert that the different theories used by secular physicists to explain gravity are not internally consistent. Even critics of Intelligent Falling admit that Einstein's ideas about gravity are mathematically irreconcilable with quantum mechanics. This fact, Intelligent Falling proponents say, proves that gravity is a theory in crisis.

"Let's take a look at the evidence," said ECFR senior fellow Gregory Lunsden."In Matthew 15:14, Jesus says, 'And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.' He says nothing about some gravity making them fall—just that they will fall. Then, in Job 5:7, we read, 'But mankind is born to trouble, as surely as sparks fly upwards.' If gravity is pulling everything down, why do the sparks fly upwards with great surety? This clearly indicates that a conscious intelligence governs all falling."

Critics of Intelligent Falling point out that gravity is a provable law based on empirical observations of natural phenomena. Evangelical physicists, however, insist that there is no conflict between Newton's mathematics and Holy Scripture.

"Closed-minded gravitists cannot find a way to make Einstein's general relativity match up with the subatomic quantum world," said Dr. Ellen Carson, a leading Intelligent Falling expert known for her work with the Kansan Youth Ministry. "They've been trying to do it for the better part of a century now, and despite all their empirical observation and carefully compiled data, they still don't know how."

"Traditional scientists admit that they cannot explain how gravitation is supposed to work," Carson said. "What the gravity-agenda scientists need to realize is that 'gravity waves' and 'gravitons' are just secular words for 'God can do whatever He wants.'"

Some evangelical physicists propose that Intelligent Falling provides an elegant solution to the central problem of modern physics.

"Anti-falling physicists have been theorizing for decades about the 'electromagnetic force,' the 'weak nuclear force,' the 'strong nuclear force,' and so-called 'force of gravity,'" Burdett said. "And they tilt their findings toward trying to unite them into one force. But readers of the Bible have already known for millennia what this one, unified force is: His name is Jesus."

Source

Thoughts about this?

TheAngel

You know, I am a Christian. I believe a combination of creationism and evolution, and this is pathetic. You cannot change scientific fact, which scientific theory basically is, especially not based on religion. Despite my beliefs I acknowledge the fact that they may some day be proven false. I believe because it makes me more comfortable with my life, makes me strive to be a better person, and comforts me when I watch people I love pass away. But come on, I mean, all the religions in the world, Christianity might be right, it might be wrong, I dont understand how religious fervor can become so great that you can say these things and in your mind believe them to be true.

quaist

I accept every religious human being, because I'm myself a Christian.

But I can't help to find those evangelical "Scientists" odd. They're calling themselves scientists, but I don't think they even recognize what a scientist is. It has nothing to do with religion, although some people think that behind every scientific theory, there is god. All this may be. But:

A scientist is not a theologian - and contrariwise.

Shera

I don't even know why I read this article - it just frustrates me and makes my head hurt. *shakes head*

I'm a Christian and believe in the bible. However, I don't believe that just because Jesus didn't mention gravity in "Matthew 15:14, Jesus says, 'And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch" that means we should throw the theory out the window. IMO, the bible is a tool to develop and strengthen my faith and should not be taken word for word. Like TheAngel, I am able to combine my faith quite easily with modern science and I don't see why it HAS to be one way or the other.

I also think that religion has no business in a public school environment. I live in a very multicultural city and it would be unfair to teach one religion's theories over anothers in the classroom. If one is interested in their children recieving religious instruction, there are many private schools dedicated to that endeavour.

Moderate Bill

This isn't exactly on topic, but I'm always uncomfortable with the statement "I don't hate because I'm a christian" It implies that Christians cannot hate, and that all hatred comes from other religions. Some of the most vicious racists I've met have been Christians, and seemed to completly ignore some of the more open minded New Testament teachings...like "Love thy neighbour" or "Let he that is without sin cast the first stone" for example. In the end, hatred and fundamentalism end up being more family-based traits.

No matter what religion you follow, the way you're taught defines how you feel about other faiths, and these vary even in the same congregation. No religion -- or branch of a religion -- can manage a consensus about certain issues.

On topic, I would like to argue that while people have the right to believe in their specific god, religious belief shouldn't be taught in public school...Too bad so many people beat me to the punch! I am very happy to see religious people who can accept and respect the beliefs of others. I haven't run into a lot of that in my city, unfortunately. You all ROCK!

quaist, you are officially my hero of the day for the use of the word contrariwise. You've earned a biscuit!

elisheva

Uh, guys? It's from The Onion, a satirical website. It isn't real; it's a parody of intelligent design.

quaist

Well...

I haven't used the word "hate" one single time in my post. The only thing I wanted to admit is, that I don't have anything against religious people - if my post sounded offense to some people - I wouldn't dislike myself, would I?

LoL... thanks.



Already forgiven my mistake with the anti-semitic source?

*Lauren

Wasn't it obvious that this was an Onion article?

Moderate Bill

Damn straight! You removed the offending things, corrected your argument and apologized. You didn't try to defend the iffy bits. What else could we ask for?

Besides, as a christian, it's in my nature to forgive! hee hee hee! (Just teasin'! I'm more of an agnostic, myself.)

I read the thread and skipped the quote, so I didn't realize...I feel like a weight has been lifted off my shoulders!

It was good that the thread existed anyway. It gave us a chance to have this discussion...and I was reminded that there open minded religious people out there, who defend the rights of others! It was totally worth it!

Oh, I wasn't saying that's what you said, or even how you think. My mind wandered a little. :3

It's just the kind of thing I hear from alot of racist christians. When Mel Gibson apologized for his drunken anti-semitism, he said that he couldn't be anti-semitic since he was christian.

quaist

Good to hear that! I was afraid that the members who read and joined the discussion may think of me as a racist/anti-semit now.



Even if the source is TheOnion, don't you think there might be some people out there like Gabriel Burdett?

Moderate Bill

Super-Cool-quaist is right...there are a few people out there who say similar things. I met a gentleman once who believed that all of reality started with the birth of Christ, and that everything that scientists have found that seems to be older was placed there by god. the pyramids, dinosaurs...everything.

I suppose we could say that we have no REAL proof that anything that happened before we were born ACTUALLY happened, but it seems a little unlikely, no?

Shera

Soooo, the article was a fake? Thank goodness. I guess for me, it seems like the Christian Right seems to be doing some crazy things lately and nothing seems unbelievable anymore. Just slap me with a noodle and call me gulible.

Jacob1983

Supporters of evolution fail to acknowledge and realize that evolution is a theory. There still to this day is not enough scientific knowledge to prove it is a fact. I'm not a big fan of evolution. And I get a little mad when schools try to teach evolution as a fact and say that intelligent design or creationism is just a fairy tale.
That article was crazy. I do believe that some extremists in the Christian movement do more harm than good and should probably keep their mouths shut. I honestly believe that both sides of where humans came from should be taught in school. If evolution is taught, then its counterpart should be taught as well. Like I said earlier, I don't believe in that much evolution. I think there is more adaptation than evolution.

My main question to scientists is "if humans came from primates, then why do primates still exist".

quaist

Maybe you'll find this article interesting.



Arguments for and against ID also.

Lexis

I don't think Creationism should be taught in science classrooms. Taught as part of a religious education program, I think its fine. That's how it worked at my school.

Jacob - I'm not a scientist but I would assume a genetic mutation (or a series of them) led to the split between primates and humans. Isn't that how most things evolved?