Does she go to a Catholic school? Sorry Christians, a lot of you actually do believe in the big bang, but seriously. The science of it is the best guess we have.
I am an atheist/agnostic, but I feel obligated to point out that the big bang theory was originally a Christian theory, and God was the one who caused the big bang. Scientists then decided that they kind of liked that theory, removed God from the equation, and claimed it as their own.
If that were my daughter, I would have cracked the shits at her teacher. Children should be provided with EVERY PERSPECTIVE, and from there, they'll make their own choices. To this girl, well done!!!
I feel like soon maybe the internet will be posting screenshots of funubstance comments all over the internet. Not saying we're stupid like the screenshots you see of tumblr but seriously, most of you guys are so clever and really funny :)
Why the freaking downvotes ? All I said is that I'm learned that God made the universe and that it could be the same in the picture. I wasn't giving any disrespect.
Questions like that shouldn't be allowed in schools teaching children. What happens when they're in college taking another class and the professor starts a discussion about the beginning. Is she going to stand up God? School is preparing you for further education and I can't imagine what type of school is going to take these sorts of answers and consider accepting you. *End rant*
I think we're afraid to tell our kids "we don't know." Not just about this, but just about anything. And I think it's because, since we're the ones demanding allegiance to the authority we inherit as we enter adulthood, admitting ignorance would be seen as some kind of weakness that we can't allow. We don't know how reality came to exist. If we did, there wouldn't be these two giant camps of people hurling their certainties at one another. I think we owe our kids painful honesty more than we owe it to ourselves to enrol them in our entrenchments.
On a side note, wmonohon, you're one of my FS heroes.
If you are actually just talking about the grammar of that sentence and not about what the "right" answer to #2 was.......then you are an idiot. The sentence is fine as there can be more than one "correct" answer to a question, which means you need to circle the one that is more correct than the other "correct" answer.
For example: When was World War II? A. 1942 B. 1939-1945 C. 1868 or D. 1964. Answer "A" IS a correct answer. WWII WAS in 1942. However, the MOST correct answer would be B, since it shows the full range of the war. Therefore even though A could be considered correct, the only answer that wouldn't be marked wrong is B since its the most correct one.
The big problem concerning the big bang theory: where did the atoms that formed the atoms and clouds come from?
You see, that is the conceit of science: it says it has an answer for everything, but it really doesn't. If one contemplates the wonders of the human body alone, one realizes no explosive accident could ever form so perfect a work. If one does so, then one must also believe a 2013 Ford Mustang could pop out of nowhere and land directly on their front lawn... but surely they're smarter to believe in something as ludicrous as that ;)
1) Science does not have all the answers of the universe, nor does it claims to, hence why we are constantly making and discarding theories. (Personally, I can think of a certain institution which does claim to have all the answers, or at least all the answers one may grasp with his/her limited, corporeal brain.)
2) The process of evolution which led to the human civilization is not comparable to an explosion creating a car; the former is a process of millions of years of natural selection and genetic diversity, whereas the later is rapid and chaotic. (This point also has nothing to do with the big bang.)
3) This is what I feel is the gist of your argument, guest: "The universe is too complex to not have a creator." Well the creator must be itself a complex thing, therefore, by this logic, it must also have a creator. (Following this trend, an infinite number of creators must exist.) Now the standard counter to this point is to state that the creator always existed. But if that is plausible, then why can we not save a step and conclude that the universe also always existed? (Yeah, I'm borrowing words from Carl Sagan.)
Pay-leo-zoh-ic
Pree-came-breeyan
Senn-o-zoh-ic
(C'mon guys join me!)
On a side note, wmonohon, you're one of my FS heroes.
Good job teacher, you definitely graduated with a diploma in grammar...
For example: When was World War II? A. 1942 B. 1939-1945 C. 1868 or D. 1964. Answer "A" IS a correct answer. WWII WAS in 1942. However, the MOST correct answer would be B, since it shows the full range of the war. Therefore even though A could be considered correct, the only answer that wouldn't be marked wrong is B since its the most correct one.
You see, that is the conceit of science: it says it has an answer for everything, but it really doesn't. If one contemplates the wonders of the human body alone, one realizes no explosive accident could ever form so perfect a work. If one does so, then one must also believe a 2013 Ford Mustang could pop out of nowhere and land directly on their front lawn... but surely they're smarter to believe in something as ludicrous as that ;)
2) The process of evolution which led to the human civilization is not comparable to an explosion creating a car; the former is a process of millions of years of natural selection and genetic diversity, whereas the later is rapid and chaotic. (This point also has nothing to do with the big bang.)