Teaching the Truth in Schools

Very good point. Furthermore, Jesus, or rather Genesis (Non-Christians use the Old Testament, too) is far from the only alternative to evolution to explain the origin of species. How about the Vishnu/Brahma/Shiva? Or perhaps the Greek gods, goddesses, and Titans? Or the Ancient Eqyptian version? Which one(s) shall be taught then?If you want to analyze these items in a comparative religion class, I find that very commendable. To touch on them in history classes is great, too -- these religions all influenced several cultures. Even in a literature class -- much of Western Literature references the Bible, after all. But in a science class, none of these apply for they are not scientifically derived theories. Only evolution, with its admitted unanswered questions debate as to its mechanisms qualifies for the science class.Ian

I hardly think the fact that only evolution is a SCIENTIFIC theory and therefore the only one suitable for a SCIENCE classroom is a technicality. It is the crux of the issue, in fact.I am not one those who has a fit if the Bible is so much as mentioned in a public school. I think it is impossible to teach the other classes I mentioned without mentioning its influence. That as may be, it isn't science. You can read why it isn't on so many posts on this site it hardly seems worth rehashing the arguments. "The Bible says . . ." isn't sufficient. Why should I believe Genesis is the truth in the first place?Shall we also teach alternate theories of the solar system? Take a look at http://www.fixedearth.com. There is alternate to the heliocentric model -- shall we teach this, too? If something is clearly wrong, or hasn't a shred of evidence there is little point. Unless you intend to use it as an example of how science works. In my biology class, we used Pasteur's experiments to disprove abiogenesis and Lamarkian evolution for those.Having mentioned that -- I now eagerly await some to jump on that statement to show I admitted evolution is impossible . . .Ian

I figured someone would pick up on the Pasteur experiment to show that I have admitted abiogenesis is impossible -- guess not!As for being forgiving of someone's status as a ninth grader. Well, yes, I hardly expect him or her to be able to differentiate Darwin from Stephen Gould from Lynn Marguiles. That is not the point. As an educator, I think you would agree it is part of you profession to challenge ignorange -- to expose the illogic, the fallacies, and present the evidence for what it is. That evidence may lead to different conclusions to logical people, and we need to equip young minds with the tools to reach those conclusions, as you indicated. So young or not -- can't let anyone get away with arguments by authority ("The Bible says") straw man arguments ("Evolution says my grandfather was a monkey") or abject denial ("There are no transitionals"). Best to learn now -- these people will be running the world when we are elderly -- I hope they will be smarter than our current generation!

I figured someone would pick up on the Pasteur experiment to show that I have admitted abiogenesis is impossible -- guess not!As for being forgiving of someone's status as a ninth grader. Well, yes, I hardly expect him or her to be able to differentiate Darwin from Stephen Gould from Lynn Marguiles. That is not the point. As an educator, I think you would agree it is part of you profession to challenge ignorange -- to expose the illogic, the fallacies, and present the evidence for what it is. That evidence may lead to different conclusions to logical people, and we need to equip young minds with the tools to reach those conclusions, as you indicated. So young or not -- can't let anyone get away with arguments by authority ("The Bible says") straw man arguments ("Evolution says my grandfather was a monkey") or abject denial ("There are no transitionals"). Best to learn now -- these people will be running the world when we are elderly -- I hope they will be smarter than our current generation!