evolution vs......

why is it that evolution is always trying to disprove creation - the christian/islamic view of creation?!why is there no arguments with other religious beliefs and views? why pick on the one that is believed by so many to be truth?!

evolution is not trying to disprove creationism at all. For some strange reason u seem to think that people who accept evolution have some kind of hidden agenda. This is simply not true. Science gathers data and AFTER examining the data forms a theory that best explains the data. After that has been done predictions are made based on the theory to test it.The ToE has been tested extensively the passed 200 years and has withstood them all. If u have a better alternative theory than the ToE, which explains the diversity of life better than the ToE currently does plz share it with us (or better yet, email it to me so I alone can claim the Nobel prize which will undoubtably be mine when I come forward with that amazing theory of yours)

You've got things backwards. It is Creationist attempts to have conservative evangelical views on creation taught in public school science classrooms that drives the debate. Scientific attacks on Creationism are merely responses to the Creationist initiatives to diminish or remove treatments of evolution from textbooks, and to diminish time spent on evolutionary issues in the classroom or have Creationist views equally represented.If Creationists were not trying to move Creationism into the secular schools then science would take no notice.--Percy

"You've got things backwards. It is Creationist attempts to have conservative evangelical views on creation taught in public school science classrooms that drives the debate. Scientific attacks on Creationism are merely responses to the Creationist initiatives to diminish or remove treatments of evolution from textbooks, and to diminish time spent on evolutionary issues in the classroom or have Creationist views equally represented.
If Creationists were not trying to move Creationism into the secular schools then science would take no notice."---i cannot accept that response - christian/creation beliefs were taught in schools before the evolutionary theory came about - now it is creation beliefs that are being kicked out of schools - there are arguments to allow "christian" teachings to remain - not evolutionary teachings"If Creationists were not trying to move Creationism into the secular schools then science would take no notice."
--again - science came about after creationist views-there were no secualr schools before evolutionary views-now creationist-christian beliefs are being kiced out of schools and textbooks - not the other way round

Christian/creation beliefs are still being taught in schools, in fact, I have just finished teaching a unit of work that I designed which integrates Religious Studies with Information Technology and the topic of the unit is 'World Creation Myths.The students have enjoyed this unit, the use of I.T. seems to be a great way of holding thier attention. Anyway I digress.The Christian creation myth, which technically you should be calling the Hebrew Creation Myth, is taught in schools, and is in fact compulsory in Scottish schools. What you may object to is that it is being taught as a BELIEF, which is what it is.Other creation myths are also taught in order to give students a fair and unbiased education. So your assertion that creation beliefs are being kicked out of schools is incorrect.Brian.------------------
Remembering events that never happened is a dangerous thing!

quote:

---

---i cannot accept that response -

---

Of course you don't. You feel threatened by evolutionary theory.

quote:

---

...christian/creation beliefs were taught in schools before the evolutionary theory came about - now it is creation beliefs that are being kicked out of schools - there are arguments to allow "christian" teachings to remain - not evolutionary teachings

---

Yes, this is how we make progress. Old, unworkable theories are disposed of and new ones replace them. I have to wonder though: 'Why did evolution displace creationism... could it be because the evidence supported it?'

quote:

---

i cannot accept that response - christian/creation beliefs were taught in schools before the evolutionary theory came about - now it is creation beliefs that are being kicked out of schools - there are arguments to allow "christian" teachings to remain - not evolutionary teachings

---

We believed that the sun revolved around the Earth before we believed that the Earth revolves around the sun. Which should we be teaching in schools?Are the scientists big old meanies for kicking out the opposing viewpoint? After all, heliocentrism is just a theory.------------------
-----------
Dan Carroll

'why is there no arguments with other religious beliefs and views? why pick on the one that is believed by so many to be truth?! 'they are allways doing this, 'is this thing loaded' came here all guns blazing,and all pissed off with jealousy against christians because his religion -evolution,is boring! lol lol lol

'Are the scientists big old meanies for kicking out the opposing viewpoint?'proven facts are an altogether different thing from supposed theories.
i can test gravity but how can i test evolution?

'Scientific attacks on Creationism are merely responses to the Creationist initiatives to diminish or remove treatments of evolution from textbooks, and to diminish time spent on evolutionary issues in the classroom or have Creationist views equally represented.'and why cant creationist views be equally represented,i have heard both sides and the evidence i reckon for creation (simple logic)suggests creation rather than evolution.
The really funny thing though,is when scientists do not argue the issue and attack the person(Jesus) like 'is it loaded' so why on earth should we believe evolution , as far as i am concerned apes or chimps have always been apes or chimps and humans have always been human!

But which lesson should it be taught in? As a religion class, fine. The one and only objection I have is to teaching it as science. It is impossible to believe in both the literal inerrancy of Genesis, and large parts of science, without absurd mental contortions. They contradict one another.[This message has been edited by Chavalon, 06-22-2003]

they contradict one another from an evolutionists view,however evo's will go to great lengths to keep it in the religion class i am sure,because they do not want anyone to know about the scientific evidence for creation.

LOL, I think a creation science course in schools would be the shortest course in the history of education.I can just see it now, the teacher addresses the class 'Read Genesis chapters 1 and 2, do not question anything in it or there will be serious trouble for you in this life and the next.''Now copy the text into your notebooks, and sit quietly for the next three months, then we will be looking at the scientific evidence that proves that if sheep mate whilst staring at striped branches then their offspring will be striped.''No, Jenkins we will not be doing any practical work!'When will the madness end?

i was thinking more of the obvious.the degeneration of the earth which fits.the rocks - Darwins problem. and other stuff like the fossils. And why millions of years which we assume even though we would all be dead because if we have a problem we need to solve,we dont evolve we go extinct.havent you wondered why in your life time so many animals have become extinct when problems arise? all degeneration,there is hundreds of scientific evidences at Creation Evidence Museum of Texas which is not taught because of evo bias.

It is not taught because it is complete and utter garbage. Your link is to the guy with the dodgy credentials, he has a doctorate for every subject you can think of! Except that no one can find them.http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/paluxy/degrees.htmlHe starts his 'scientific evidence for creation' off with a flaming Bible quote!Then 'Coal, the scientific evidence for a young Earth'!What on earth does that have to do with creation? The age of the Earth is irrelevant to whether or not we were created.You really should be a bit more critical of the material that you read, refuting evolution does not mean that creation is true.What is your evidence that every life form on Earth appeared complete within a 6 day period around 6000 years ago?Do you never think of things like this ?I suppose this degeneration is down to that crazy chick that ate a fruit 6000 years ago? Very scientific that.------------------
Remembering events that never happened is a dangerous thing!