- Jan 21, 2007
- 20,382
- 7,476
- 45
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
This didn't show up in my subscribed threads, for some reason. Am sorry. It looks really rude that I didn't respond
So teach kids about both - give them all the information we have on both, and allow them to come to their own conclusions. Both schools of thought do have merit.
Except there *are* scientists who also believe in creationsim. Have a look http://www.answersingenesis.org and you'll see that for many, creationism is something defendable. It's a genuine area of apologetics. I personally don't hold to a literal translation of Genesis, but many do, for what they feel are legitimate, scientifically valid reasons.It’s not about mocking it’s about being ill equipped to do a subject because they're ill informed of the realities of science.
Most of the people in uni I've known were Christian (a few dozen) but only one was a creationist and she wasn't mocked. My MSc supervisor was a devout Christian who did a talk in his church every week and occasionally reminded me about how he worried about my atheism, he also considered creationism to be invalid as a science.
Macro-evolution isn't verifiable, either, but that's taught as a science. Science isn't as black and white as that.As Marcus stated science isn’t a democracy, science lessons should reflect the realities of science in academia and industry. Creationism is simply not used by either because it’s useless when it comes to scientific research so what’s the point of teaching it?
Ghosts and homeopathy... I wouldn't be so quick to say no with those. I don't believe ghosts exist, but enough people do to validate it being taught. At least an exposition of what they could be. And homeopathy has legitimate affects on the body. So, again, that has scientific merit. But, no, the sun circling the earth is crazy talk and doesn't belong in a science class.If people want their kids taught creationism they should send them to a church that holds that view, or give them genesis to read. There is nothing to be gained by giving it some false legitimacy in a science lesson but I do think if a student does bring up a question on creationism it should be addressed and not dismissed.
Many parents hold beliefs in Ghosts, homoeopathy and a small number hold the sun goes round the earth, should these things be also taught as science?
But, again, so does macro-evolution. It's so far untested, unverified and 100% theory, and yet it's taught as fact.I’m not implying believing in creationism is criminal and I'm sorry if you thought that was my implication. I’m saying that creationism is essentially anti-science. My analogy might be overly emotive but that’s how I as a scientist feel. Creationism weakens science because it adds untestable elements that make the whole process of science useless.
So teach kids about both - give them all the information we have on both, and allow them to come to their own conclusions. Both schools of thought do have merit.
Upvote
0