should creationism be taught in schools?

quote:

---

It's special because it's a high profile and controversial subject.

---

It is not controversial within science, though.Shouldn't we teach science in science class?

quote:

---

i've never understood why ppl keep saying that kids should 'go look at the evidence themselves' and not allow all the ideas to be shown since niether one is proven. =)

---

Do you think that we should spend a lot of time on flat earth or geocentrism in science class?

quote:

---

The evidence supports creation better than evolution and creation as a possibility has not been falsified so which one should we teach?

---

Hi Beretta,Since you hold this position, I would like to invite you to address the OP in my thread, How can Biologists believe in the ToE?.I am very interested in reading your response. Edited by nator, : No reason given.

Again, Beretta, I would ask you to address the OP of my thread, How Can Biologists Believe in the ToE?Do you think PhD Biologists are stupid?

quote:

---

For these sorts of reasons, I say both sides of the debate should be allowed to present the evidence for and against their positions and people should be inspired to continue to search for the truth since the truth is historical and cannot be experimentally repeated and proven.

---

What makes you think that there is only one Creation story?

quote:

---

I don't think there's only one story but I absolutely believe there is only one that makes sense, that has loads of historical and archeological verification in its favour and lines up with the evidence -not as well as evolution -better than evolution.

---

Well, other religious people think their creation story is better than yours, based on their own faith-biased opinions.If we teach one faith-based Creation myth, we have to teach them all.And I would really like to know if you think that Biologists are stupid. Edited by nator, : No reason given.

Do you really think that the hundreds of thousands of scientists who have been advancing our understanding Biology over the last 150 years at the most astonishing pace have all just been deluded? Since several of the main occupations of scientists are critically examining theory and trying to falsify hypotheses, are you also accusing all of those Biologists of being so poor at doing science that they have, to a person, missed the fact that the overarching, foundational theory that underpins all Biology is completely false?Also, do you accept DNA paternity testing as based in fact?Edited by nator, : No reason given.

Oh, I forgot to ask you in my other message; what kind of Biologist is your father? What does he study?

Do you really think that the hundreds of thousands of scientists who have been advancing our understanding Biology over the last 150 years at the most astonishing pace have all just been deluded? Since several of the main occupations of scientists are critically examining theory and trying to falsify hypotheses, are you also accusing all of those Biologists of being so poor at doing science that they have, to a person, missed the fact that the overarching, foundational theory that underpins all Biology is completely false?

quote:

---

Well then we should stop teaching them evolution in that case.

---

Do you really think that the hundreds of thousands of scientists who have been advancing our understanding Biology over the last 150 years at the most astonishing pace have all just been deluded? Since several of the main occupations of scientists are critically examining theory and trying to falsify hypotheses, are you also accusing all of those Biologists of being so poor at doing science that they have, to a person, missed the fact that the overarching, foundational theory that underpins all Biology is completely false?

quote:

---

If they believe evolution, yes

---

That is an astounding statement.How on earth do you support this statement?How could hundreds of thousands of competing professional Biologists over many decades all be so profoundly wrong, since current work is based upon past work?If the past work was wrong, then predictions made based upon it would not be borne out. Yet, we do see successful predictions being made based upon what you think are faulty premises.You seem to forget that theories are constantly tested in science. Every time a new fossil is dug up, that is a test of validity of the ToE. So far, no such tests of the ToE have disproved it.How could that be if it was false?

quote:

---

-they started with believing in evolution and materialistic causes for everything and now they can't see the wood for the trees.

---

How arrogant of you to dismiss the work of hundresd of thousands of highly-educated scientists.

quote:

---

Believing in evolution is not critical for experimental science so they have not altogether wasted their time.In fact there's a whole lot of great science out there and not everyone doing science uses evolution to prove what they are trying to prove.

---

Yeah, right. More vague claims that you fail to provide specifics on.

quote:

---

No not to a person -there are those that do not believe it and there are many that do not need to use it at all and therefore can carry on doing what they're doing with no ill effects nor incorrect conclusions.

---

Not really. Biologists really do use the ToE all the time.

quote:

---

A surgeon may believe the theory of evolution but when he's doing surgery, believing it is not going to change what he does.

---

Since surgeouns aren't scientists and don't do science, I'm not sure why you bring them up.

quote:

---

Technical advances are not dependant on the theory of evolution.

---

If they work in genetics they certainly are.

quote:

---

Well that's just brilliant. Only thing is that I disagree with losing the evolution part -we have to deal with the consensus. Kids need to know why evolution is accepted and that it happens to be the consensus -for the moment -but they also need to know why it is not necessarily the truth and why some don't accept it despite the general acceptance.It's called a paradigm shift and I'm all for it.

---

So, if there was a small but very vocal and politically active group of Holocaust deniers who had enough influence within the local school board to get the idea that the Holocaust never happened taught in history classes, would you be "all for" that, too?

quote:

---

No, I'm not interested in self delusion. Holocaust deniers cannot be put together with evolution deniers. Holocaust deniers refuse direct historical evidence like photos and pictures and newspapers and eye-witness accounts.

---

Just as Evolution-deniers reject direct evidence of evolution happening in real time, both in the lab and in the field, as well as historical evidence written in every single fossil, and in every single instance of congruence between morphological and genetic trees of life.There ARE eye-witness accounts of evolution happening.There IS copious amounts of direct historical evidence of evolution having happened.You just deny or ignore all of the evidence (and are likely ignorant of most of it), just as Holocaust deniers deny or ignore evidence. They say they just "interperet" the evidence differently and come to a different conclusion. They say that the eyewitnesses were mistaken or are deluded, just as you think scientists are mistaken or deluded. Why shouldn't their different interpretation of the evidence be taught in history class, if your different interpretation is taught in science class?

quote:

---

People that do not believe in evolution have no such direct historical accounts to deny.Fossils could mean anything -you have to put them in a frame of reference in order to make sense of them -that is a completely different concept.

---

But that is exactly what historians do, too, Beretta. Evolutionary Biology is the study of the natural history of life on Earth.Those ovens in the camps could have been for burning dead bodies, not for gassing people alive. Why do you deny the truth? We should allow both theories to be taught in schools so children can make up their own minds. They should be exposed to ALL interpretations of the evidence.Right?

quote:

---

Besides if you were ever forced to teach such a thing as holocaust denial, all you have to do is bring out the historical evidence and explain why some people do believe it.

---

My dear, the same is true of Creationism/ID. Exactly the same.

quote:

---

Unfortunately Ahmadinejad's supporters won't be hearing any evidence of the holocaust in their schools anytime soon.No controversy, just refuse to allow the opponent's evidence in.

---

And that has been the goal of the anti-science camp all along. To force Biology out of the science classroom.Edited by nator, : No reason given.

quote:

---

This is just absurd. someone has really been giving you funny stories and I don't understand why.

---

You do realize that the teaching of Evolution in certain parts of the USwas illegal not all that long ago, don't you?

So, Beretta, what scientific predictions does ID make?How have they been tested?What were the results?