Writing a thesis is a daunting task that many students find challenging.

It requires extensive research,

critical analysis, and the ability to articulate complex ideas effectively. Crafting a thesis on a topic as
vast and intricate as American creation adds an extra layer of difficulty.

The process of writing an American creation thesis involves delving into centuries of history,
exploring the cultural, political, and social factors that have shaped the nation. From the founding
fathers to pivotal moments in American history, the breadth of material to cover can be
overwhelming.

Furthermore, developing a unique perspective or argument within the realm of American creation
requires deep insight and original thinking. It's not simply about regurgitating facts but synthesizing
information in a way that adds value to the existing body of knowledge.

Given the challenges associated with writing a thesis on American creation, many students seek
assistance to ensure their work meets the highest academic standards. That's where ⇒
HelpWriting.net ⇔ comes in.

At ⇒ HelpWriting.net ⇔, we understand the complexities of crafting a thesis and offer expert

assistance to students in need. Our team of experienced writers specializes in American history and
can provide tailored support at every stage of the writing process.

Whether you need help refining your research question, organizing your thoughts, or polishing your
prose, our professional writers are here to assist you. With their expertise and guidance, you can feel
confident that your American creation thesis will be a compelling and academically rigorous piece of
work.

Don't let the challenges of writing a thesis hold you back. Order from ⇒ HelpWriting.net ⇔ today
and take the first step toward academic success.
When I started religion classes there, while there was some bias, I got to hear other peoples points of
view and beliefs which helped me to start figuring out what it was that I truly believed. I asked you
if he accounted for the pre-democracy advances in science. It pops up everytime I google something,
basically because it's true. So I'll just mention that a lot of the political developments that the German
states underwent in the 19th-20th centuries arose from the destabilization of Napoleon's adventures.
And even men like Newton couldn't quite shake the belief in magic---he spent much time on
alchemy, Kepler on astrology. I'd recommend that Tom read the book so that Ferris himself can
present the case, but he's rejected that idea since he holds the superior thesis and has already proven
Ferris, the science writer hack, wrong. He has done a great deal of study regarding the history of
science. That's my meta-argument against what I consider Ferris' less comprehensive one: not that
he's wrong, but by only starting in the Western world at the Renaissance, he doesn't look at a big
enough historical and philosophical picture that takes in all of man and the history of science. It had
now been found that the process can be sped up by natural selection and other genetic processes. I
believe that He hears my prayers and answers them and I believe that God did create the universe
and everything in it but he chose to do it in a ways that we, his children, can study scientifically so
we can better understand Him and His plan for us. I’ve been thinking about Colin Woodard’s
excellent “American Nations” which surveys the development of the disparate collection of nations
we imagine to be “The United States of America.” The very different religious histories of the Deep
South and the Yankee NE, for example, explain a great deal. Until we can all agree as to what we
fight for, then there will always be wars, and rumors of wars. If the prevailing view had been that
science is pointless because God is the cause of everything then the science tradition would have died
in the world. I think you need to break loose and get a copy of it so you can lead us in a discussion
of Ferris' book. It was found that despite attempts made by scientific and educational agencies to
provide guidelines such as the Next Generation Science Standards, the majority of American state
science standards continue to be sub-par and one of the major flaws of these standards is the overall
attempt to weaken the coverage of evolution throughout the standards. Education allows freedom of
thought, such that, the student explores possibly different ways of thinking, seeing and doing things.
That's why I think the historical tension between conservative caution and progressive enthusiasm
has been for the most part a constructive model. Free societie's are open to change and ideas are not
threatening to authority in our governmment (unless it subverts the rule of law in maintaining order
where others are concerned). It stands as counterargument to Ferris' thesis, as does Nazi rocket and
jet technology, which cannot be waved away as mere engineering---there was plenty of theory
involved. I believe that God sent Jesus to cleanse me of my sin and I believe that He loves me.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but
insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages. Or at least not for long and the outcome's
generally not pretty (RE: Lysenko). You and Angie can have the rest of this thread, talking past each
other, each for your own purposes, pretending to be having a discussion with each other. The citizens
were recognized as such and retained the rights of citizenship (in my short search I couldn’t find any
specific documentation). My conclusions were my own and there was no hint of pressure otherwise.
In that sense, the Bush invasion can be seen as having some noble motivations; but, if anything, it
hurt progress and not by a little.. Ferris talks about liberal democracy and how important it has been
in the world. Enlightenment And America Oxford Research Encyclopedia Of American History
Empirical Science American History Education I was a masters student back in 07 and i chose my
thesis topic dissertation if you are a uk student based on some. A guy from Iraq who I met in Munich
during the 1st Gulf War. This information helps us design a better experience for all users.
Rocks formed of and thus lie closer to the bottom of sedimentary rock than more recently depos-. A
commenter on a philosophy blog I participate on sent me a citation from the Roman Lucius today,
and all I could do was think of you, Phil. Modern science is possible without liberal democracy---as I
proved---but it's fairly impossible without Western Civilization and specifically Aristotle. Even
Gronk, Sister Miriam Paul, who had a face like the Wicked Witch of the West that could scare the
bejesus out of any babe-in-arms just by smiling at them. The problem with history is that it happens so
slowly in the present it's hard to see what it will look like tomorrow. I'll keep this in mind as I work
my way through the book. So they say nothing, if they can avoid it; they know how far they have to
fall to the level of everyone else. It's just a pretense at discussion, not a real one. From a review by
my former colleague at The Reform Club blog, Herb London: Notwithstanding the obvious fact that
Europeans have at long last come to love freedom, they still seem to be incapable of defending it. In
fact, they may drain society of valued resources. And without understanding our liberties, Americans
do disservice to furture liberty. I feel obligated to tie this in with the American Creation. Instead of
hijacking this thread maybe someone could do a similar The Science of Liberty post. Over the past
few centuries, two transformations--one scientific, the other democratic--have altered the thinking
and the well-being of the human species. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go
directly to that page in the book. The link is a serious study of Islamic theology for anyone interested.
These investigations provide evidence about the evolutionary pathways that (left) are more closely.
See full terms and conditions and this month's choices. Science studies natural phenomena, it is not a
system of values (moral or otherwise). If the Hodgson thesis has any meaning, it is as an exemplar of
a new genre of historiography called “American Declinism.” Rather than admire American
accomplishments, the revisionists like Hodgson emphasize the flaws. The former are idealists acting
from highest motives for the greatest good of the greatest number. This information helps us design a
better experience for all users. Maybe I am off-base and don't understand the discussion at all, but it
seems that the authoritarian argument is about who and what is to rule.as to developing man's
potentiality. And my core argument is that the Golden Age Muslims, followed by Roger Bacon and
medieval Christianity---and both flowing from Aristotle---had confidence that God was rational and
so was the universe, making scientific inquiry worthwhile in the first place. Very tactful Angie!:-)
Tom, please don't decide so be tactful yourself. You can see all the life: the intelligence, the love,
everything they were in life completely drain from them and all thats left is an empty vessel. One
weakness of this thoughtful and thoroughly entertaining book is that Mr. Ferris might have offered a
more satisfactory explanation of how, in the last years of the 18th century, the Enlightenment itself
led to such different results in Paris and in Philadelphia, producing a Robespierre there and a
Jefferson here. Read a few pages of this and it shows the difficulties Muslim theology ran into as its
concept of God's nature ran into physical reality. And that you rejected these wackos, well, that's part
of your path as a living, breathing, thinking human being endowed by God with a brain and free will.
Or as Chesterton put it in another context Man could say nothing to God, nothing about God, except
in an almost inarticulate cry for mercy.in a world where all natural things were useless.
And, so, the suspicion gives umph to our curiosity to learn more of what Ferris has to say.. So,
methinks, Tom, thou doest protest too much. Perhaps there's an intelligent reply in your book there
someplace. See how Ferris traces Locke.. I'm not ashamed to admit that I have an anger toward
religionism with its authoritarian ways. I haven't read Ferris's work so I can't comment on whether or
not he properly distinguishes between the two. Free exchange of services for the means of
sustenance. But I can't let the assertion pass that my questions have been answered. The existence of
God and His role in our lives was not even a question. You are not, but many white folks are,
predisposed to believe that Obama is the antichrist just because he is black. That is the common
misunderstanding of the argument these days. No, I'm asking you to explain it, since you're the one
reading the book. Until we can all agree as to what we fight for, then there will always be wars, and
rumors of wars. I thoroughly enjoyed the book but I promised my father I would at least give some
Young-Earth Creationist views a chance. Fresh legislation has been put forward in Colorado,
Missouri and Montana. It stands as counterargument to Ferris' thesis, as does Nazi rocket and jet
technology, which cannot be waved away as mere engineering---there was plenty of theory involved.
The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have
no such desire. I asked you if he accounted for the pre-democracy advances in science. And my core
argument is that the Golden Age Muslims, followed by Roger Bacon and medieval Christianity---and
both flowing from Aristotle---had confidence that God was rational and so was the universe, making
scientific inquiry worthwhile in the first place. Fear that was centuries in the making is not eliminated
by legislation although legislation is necessary for it to be reduced. That is my point.philosophy is
man's attempt to understand and know about things in the world. That's my meta-argument against
what I consider Ferris' less comprehensive one: not that he's wrong, but by only starting in the
Western world at the Renaissance, he doesn't look at a big enough historical and philosophical picture
that takes in all of man and the history of science. No matter how facts are presented, if it doesn’t
support such naive beliefs, people are incapable of changing. I'm not going to be your strawman.. I
asked several times for a thread on Ferris' book. The drosophilid flies of Hawaii provide an excellent
banding patterns make it especially easy to. All place it between 6,000 and 10,000 years ago, each
group being certain their date is correct. This time I'm going to break my daughter's rules and mark it
up as I go.. It is a fascinating read.. I'm sure you will like his scholarly approach, Jimmy Ray.
Philosophy helps one to form that frame so that progress can be seen. I know that life itself is old, we
have scientific proof of it, but the question for me remained how exactly did life begin and develop.
I'm convinced your seditious comments do as much to keep this blog active as all the intellectual
discussion combined;-). It's that the facts turn out not to be on your side. I have additional thoughts
that this discussion has triggered, but they can wait for a more proper time.
If the prevailing view had been that science is pointless because God is the cause of everything then
the science tradition would have died in the world. The history of Islam and Islamic culture goes
back a ways and its earliest history is radically different than its present history. Science is grounded
in the natural world using empirical methods and pure mathematics is much more abstract. And
several Syrians in college who genuinely liked their classmates but were certain our government was
run by Satan. I've assumed that it's occurred to you that the book hasn't been finished by anyone here
that have started the project, so forcing a defense is premature. I think Angie made a good point
about being educated. The less said about Hodgson's anti-neocon screed masquerading as history the
better. He tries to exact a toll from everyone who crosses over the bridge here. Tracing the
development of America’s high self regard from the early days of the republic to the present era,
Hodgson demonstrates how its exceptionalism has been systematically exaggerated and—in recent
decades—corrupted. The members of this group dispersed throughout Africa. No matter how facts
are presented, if it doesn’t support such naive beliefs, people are incapable of changing. But if I come
off as hostile and angry and or a hater then I'll rethink commenting. Ferris is a science writer, so
when all you've got is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. Science. Liberty. Balderdash. Liberty
was in the works well before modern science. As for the Wizard of Oz, see Ben Franklin above on
the Bible and natural law. It was during this time that I started read about the subject and I read a.
The top 25 excellent dissertation topic ideas on the history of usa. How many of us believe humans
were created in the recent past, and why does that belief matter. But, at the same time, ethics
demands a constancy with what traditional values of behavior. And, he brings in actions that
unfolded in other parts of Western Civilization around the time of the American Revolution and
Founding.. He is building a fairly strong case about how free speech fueled ideas that led to the
major changes in world politics during the late eighteenth century. But it's the judgment of every
century over the last 500 years, if not always immediately self evident. I'm sure you're questioning
Ferris' authority word by word.;-). I just think it is deceptive to use religious language to get the
religious on board, when 'secular' language (as the religious term it) will do just fine. They saw that
nature had specific rules that were governed by an authority--the God of nature.. It came to some
that humans were as much a part of nature as any other thing.. Were they coming to believe that man
was as controlled by nature as were ther earth and all existence. An almost equal number (38%)
believe we developed over millions of years in a process guided by God. All you want to do is argue,
and argue with me. Forget me. I'm not a topic here. Tom, You presuppose that math is only
realistic.or that natural laws are ONLY causal.what about probabilities and possibilities. They have a
much better understanding and appreciation for liberty than my American friends do. It is my
opinion, and I've said it before, that the Enlightenment didn't create secular ideas but instead created
the space for more secular ideas and approaches to gain traction and prosper. Register for a free
account to start saving and receiving special member only perks. One is the negative effect of strong
feelings about others, in this case the incumbent of the White House.
I'll be interested to see how my speculation holds up. Or look to modern Islamic totalitarian societies
that reject modernity and where scientific conclusions are dictated by religion. But I think its
productiveness is over, unless somebody has something substantive to add. On the other hand, I gave
you a better thesis than Ferris did, and didn't charge you 25 bucks. It's just a pretense at discussion,
not a real one. It's basically a variant of what Allen Guelzo calls the Harvard Narrative. When I
started religion classes there, while there was some bias, I got to hear other peoples points of view
and beliefs which helped me to start figuring out what it was that I truly believed. Perhaps there's an
intelligent reply in your book there someplace. For example, Thomas, you have put Ferris out of
bounds as a person for which one might have some respect and that says much, much more about
you than it does Ferris or his works. But, the process of getting rid of the old and transforming into
the new is a process of reflection and study. Peirce was quite an amazing man, but I think his
brilliance is only beginning to be appreciated. Here he goes again. He's not listening to you either,
Angie. Indeed Kepler and Galileo corresponded, but Galileo didn't build on Kepler's work. I've tried
to be respectful and constructive and for the life of me I don't recall ever saying anything here that
was overtly against religion or specifically Christianity. When the matter in the center of Telescope.
Such disks. These cannot be defined for any individual, unless one lives under dictatorial rule. And
no, this is not a religious right-specific problem (or a right or left problem). This dissertation provides
a comprehensive look at the issue from historical, judicial and educational perspectives. Where
people put those lines in defending libertarianism, or Constitutionalism is again debatable in free
societies. And, when the tide is up, I move it right out of the harbor onto the sea. Da Vinci worked
for the Duke of Milan and studied under neo-Platonists and Aristotelians. DNA sequences will be
more similar than the DNA sequences for two species. And, he talks about what took place in France
around those same few decades. You can't artificially impose a scientific conclusion. The Myth of
American Exceptionalism by Godfrey Hodgson, a Fellow at the Rothermere American Institute,
University of Oxford, takes a quasi-antagonistic stance against the idea of American povidentialism
and its alleged impediment of America's true heritage and purpose. North and South America to
separate, after which their respective mammals. Timothy Ferris writes, on page 4 of his book, “The
claim that science flourishes only in liberal-democratic environments rests on five assertions. “First,
science is inherently antiauthoritarian. There's a correlation between the Western world and travel
and familiarity with other cultures. And, if progress means a steady movement and if to restrain
means to hold back and to control, then, ultimately authority does restrain scientific progress. Jesus,
Phil, that's not even the right Timothy Ferris.
I'd just hoped to tease out a decent argument for Ferris' thesis, because I haven't heard one yet.
Where people put those lines in defending libertarianism, or Constitutionalism is again debatable in
free societies. But, it is not what our Founders did to Christian communities. Scientific fact and truth
are simply more powerful than superstition, more powerful than politics. Whereas political authority
is quite another thing.. Tom can be quite the obfuscator. My father is an extremely intelligent man
who reads and researches his beliefs but he is blindly religious. This information helps us design a
better experience for all users. How did Voltaire or the brilliant but undisciplined babblings of
Rousseau get us to the moon. Oh, there's nothing in the Declaration or the Constitution or the Bible
or Roman Law to support anyone's foolishness. It's that the facts turn out not to be on your side. The
citizens were recognized as such and retained the rights of citizenship (in my short search I couldn’t
find any specific documentation). The problem with history is that it happens so slowly in the present
it's hard to see what it will look like tomorrow. Huskinson offers a smart analysis of religious anti-
evolution movements which neither demonises nor ridicules but seeks to understand the tenets and
beliefs of a movement far more complex and multivalent than most of us appreciate. Love is
supportive of the other person's efforts at self discovery and as such, is at the root of liberty. The
facts of the matter are that authority is effective in restraining scientific progress. And I write this to
you Ben, as a manifestly sensible and unangry man. Read a few pages of this and it shows the
difficulties Muslim theology ran into as its concept of God's nature ran into physical reality. If the
Hodgson thesis has any meaning, it is as an exemplar of a new genre of historiography called
“American Declinism.” Rather than admire American accomplishments, the revisionists like Hodgson
emphasize the flaws. Modern chimpanzees, today but from a species that no longer exists. He
touches on the lives of many historical celebrities and he shows how that line (I mentioned above)
developed to feed the minds of America's Founding Fathers. It is clear to me that God chose us to be
His children and to love Him forever but how or why he chose to differentiate us from the rest of the
primates is still unclear to me. That is the common misunderstanding of the argument these days. The
link is a serious study of Islamic theology for anyone interested. Not only does the individual
scientist have a right to his own convictions, but also the questions about what his commitments are
to be. As Ferris states, his thesis is that there is a symbiotic relationship between science and liberty
and that they mutual flourish. These are all Islamic societies, and some are Islamic States. Those who
do not produce, are unnecessary for society. Actually he was testing the wrong grade of graphite, but
his results were taken at face value, leading German bomb scientists to conclude that only heavy
water could do the job. One is the negative effect of strong feelings about others, in this case the
incumbent of the White House. Most Christians around the world do not take a literal view of the
Genesis creation narrative but as we’ve seen, many in the US do.
The suppression of Galileo is overblown as a touchstone. So, the politicalization of science is the
demise of our society's liberal democratic governing. She couldn't deal with the differences between
the cultures of birth and the West. And your constant bagging on immigrants and 21st Islamic jihad
should probably get your posts deleted immediately, because all they do is junk up the threads and
make this blog less serious. That's my meta-argument against what I consider Ferris' less
comprehensive one: not that he's wrong, but by only starting in the Western world at the Renaissance,
he doesn't look at a big enough historical and philosophical picture that takes in all of man and the
history of science. In fact, if you look at the politics of science today, it's scientists themselves who
suppress each others' work out of self- or partisan interest. No Christian is any better than any other,
and no better than any man. However, some of the liberals' more practical proposals came to fruition
later in the 1850s and 1860s when it was realized that they were essential to economic efficiency. Or
as Chesterton put it in another context Man could say nothing to God, nothing about God, except in
an almost inarticulate cry for mercy.in a world where all natural things were useless. It looks to me
that Ferris has gone back far enough in history to trace a particular line regarding the development of
the ideas that led Western Civilization to think about self government. Since I've already started The
Science of Liberty I don't think I'll be looking into much more than a cursory glance at the preface -
It could be interesting to get the perspective of an intimate outsider though. I'd recommend that Tom
read the book so that Ferris himself can present the case, but he's rejected that idea since he holds the
superior thesis and has already proven Ferris, the science writer hack, wrong. Correlation is not cause,
and there was a constellation of factors that made the West the West, from the orderly thought of
Aristotle to a religion whose God was reasonable and created a rational universe, to scores of great
universities to material abundance unmatched in human history, and eventually to peace and
prosperity, surely the two things necessary to any endeavor beyond mere subsistence. If the
prevailing view had been that science is pointless because God is the cause of everything then the
science tradition would have died in the world. That standard could be a sacred revelation or it
could be something else--like a university degree or some diploma hanging on a wall. Some features
of this site may not work without it. But he did all his early work under a king, and built his work on
Descartes, who also lived under a king. And our rocket and jet engine technology is still substantially
that of Nazi Germany's, is it not. To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more
securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser. Maybe I'm not much of a literalist as I
am one who looks for what is underlying. Our country's educational system is where positive liberty
also is affirmed. Da Vinci worked for the Duke of Milan and studied under neo-Platonists and
Aristotelians. Over the past few centuries, two transformations--one scientific, the other democratic-
-have altered the thinking and the well-being of the human species. In Oklahoma, there are two bills
before the state legislature that include potentially creationist language. To not be informed of
Islam's full history might not lead to the best understanding of its potential today and might lead one
to a false sense of superiority which might in turn lead to someone saying something like, 'screw the
backwards sand monkeys lets bomb them back to the stone age and show them what real freedom
and democracy is all about.' I'm not saying you or anyone on this blog but I've traveled to some very
strange and dark places in the back alleys of cyberspace. Meanwhile, in our more liberal and
democratic country, we were able to enjoy an immense kick in scientific achievement and subsequent
technologically-based affluence and defense capabilities (this would be the environment that science
flourished in the universities, at the Bell labs, at Dow chemical, etc.). We not only got to the moon
and back but we got Tang in the process. He appears to be focused on the social phenomena which
have historically interfered with scientific inquiry. i.e. the usual suspects. Among those it is
abundantly obvious that authority has been its greatest inhibitor. And it's not that we'll ever totally
agree---it's that we agree that there's a truth to be sought. And, when the tide is up, I move it right
out of the harbor onto the sea. Diplomacy is what is attempted to bring about resolution when these
differences of value collide.