Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,865 Year: 4,122/9,624 Month: 993/974 Week: 320/286 Day: 41/40 Hour: 7/6


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Parable of the candle - should million/billion year dating be taught as fact?
Percy
Member
Posts: 22502
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 12 of 98 (432794)
11-08-2007 8:06 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Macuahuitl
11-07-2007 9:00 PM


Hi Macuahuitl,
In science class we teach the current understanding of science, at an age appropriate level, of course. The current understanding of science is that the earth and universe are old and that man and all other life evolved from earlier life forms. What you're proposing is to not teach science in science class.
Furthermore, "It is the height of Bigotry to have only one theory of origins taught in our schools" (Clarence Darrow, see http://www.baptistpillar.com/bd0354.htm - although this quote is often refuted, it is still at the height of bigotry).
I can see why it is "often refuted." For one thing it seems an unlikely thing for Darrow to say, since at the Scope trial that's precisely what he was advocating, teaching the scientific theory of life's origins, of which there is only one. For another, likening it to bigotry seems unlikely for Darrow, since he actually saw the situation as a violation of the separation of church and state. Poking around I found Clarence Darrow Misquoted by Creationists at TalkOrigins, take a peek.
If there were more than one scientific "theory of origins", that would imply that no scientific consensus had developed and that there was no agreed upon scientific understanding, and it would be inappropriate under most circumstances to teach either one, other than to perhaps take note of the uncertainty. It's not that there's any inherent objection to teaching two or more different theories of the same natural phenomenon, but even at the high school level this would be challenging and confusing for most students and I think it should be left out of formal curriculums, leaving teachers to decide whether any particular unresolved area of scientific study should be introduced.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Macuahuitl, posted 11-07-2007 9:00 PM Macuahuitl has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22502
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 86 of 98 (433990)
11-13-2007 9:52 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by mike the wiz
11-13-2007 11:56 AM


Re: Canyon
Subbie's response deserves to be reinforced. There would be no debate if creationists weren't pushing their religious agenda into public schools. We believe in religious freedom and that people everywhere should be free to worship according to their own beliefs, but in churches, not science classrooms. Science class should teach that which science has learned using the scientific method. If creationists want science taught in science class, then they should take their science to science journals and conferences instead of to schools boards and state legislatures. They should stop bypassing the scientific process and start participating.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by mike the wiz, posted 11-13-2007 11:56 AM mike the wiz has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024