Why is evolution taught in our schools?

[VirOptimus]

See my post #4 in this thread.

I know you know, but not the one I directed the post at.

 

[Neostarwcc]

I would agree that it was the school itself, and not homeschooling in general (though, it was southern baptist). Having to learn everything from scratch after the fact (science, history, and math especially) wasn't that bad, in the long run. It's instilled a love of learning for me.

As for the GED, when I took it the test had changed. Before one needed a fifth grade education to pass, but now it goes into college levels of knowledge for sure. If you pass highly enough, you even get college credit.

Anyways! Sorry to go off topic, education is just something I'm passionate about, and it doesn't take much to send me on a tangent. =)

When my sister took the GED test it was geared towards like middle school. I think they just wanted people to pass and to push kids through the educational system.

 

[mark kennedy]

I guess my school was unique. I don't have a problem with Evolution being taught as a substitution to creationism. I mean after all someone already pointed out why it isn't taught in our schools its because this country has freedom of religion and creation science is Christian science only. So... That's why it isn't taught in school but when you're taught that its fact its just not proper education you know?

its not taught because its religious, religion shouldnt be ridiculed either. Its kind of hard to teach biology without discussing adaptive evolution, just leave the controversy regarding creationism and darwinism extraciricular and I have no issues. Ive never advocated teaching creationism in the public schools because they dont understand the doctrine of creation. So leave it alone and stick to the particulars of biology and genetics, that should suffice.

 

[expos4ever]

This notion that evolution “has to be demonstrated in a lab or I won’t believe it” is clearly misguided. And clearly so. Thinking adults cannot possibly really believe this. No reasonable person denies, for example, that the Chicago Cubs won the 2016 World Series.

The evidence for this is overwhelming, just as is the evidence for evolution. And neither can be replicated.

 

[JackRT]

I know you know, but not the one I directed the post at.

I know you know I know.

 

[Neostarwcc]

Thank you. I must have missed them when skimming this thread.

 

[Neostarwcc]

its not taught because its religious, religion shouldnt be ridiculed either. Its kind of hard to teach biology without discussing adaptive evolution, just leave the controversy regarding creationism and darwinism extraciricular and I have no issues. Ive never advocated teaching creationism in the public schools because they dont understand the doctrine of creation. So leave it alone and stick to the particulars of biology and genetics, that should suffice.

Agreed.

 

[Neostarwcc]

I know you know I know.

Lol. Thanks for making my day.

 

[sfs]

This notion that evolution “has to be demonstrated in a lab or I won’t believe it” is clearly misguided. And clearly so. Thinking adults cannot possibly really believe this. No reasonable person denies, for example, that the Chicago Cubs won the 2016 World Series.

The evidence for this is overwhelming, just as is the evidence for evolution. And neither can be replicated.

But I didn't see the Cubs win with my own eyes!

 

[sfs]

So... That's why it isn't taught in school but when you're taught that its fact its just not proper education you know?

If taught properly, students will learn the fact that humans and all other known species share common ancestors, and will also learn about the evolutionary theory that explains how that happened.

 

[46AND2]

But I didn't see the Cubs win with my own eyes!

I did. It was wonderful.

 

[mark kennedy]

You dont really need much of a theory for universal common ancestry, just naturalistic assumptions and organize the evidence around that

 

[expos4ever]

As a believer myself, I think I know what you evolution skeptics are going through: you think that abandonning young earth creationism puts your very identity at risk. As one who has made switch from a somewhat feeble attachment to creationism many decades ago to the more solid ground of scientific fact, I assure you the world will not come to an end.

 

[Neostarwcc]

As a believer myself, I think I know what you evolution skeptics are going through: you think that abandonning young earth creationism puts your very identity at risk. As one who has made switch from a somewhat feeble attachment to creationism many decades ago to the more solid ground of scientific fact, I assure you the world will not come to an end.

Actually, no. I believe in young earth creationism because that's what the bible says happened not to mention all of the evidence out there for creationism. I could easily believe in the billions of years and still believe in God and still be a saved Christian. But when the very word of God says that the heavens and the Earth were created in six literal days some 6,000 someodd years ago than that's what I'll believe. We're all going to find out when we die what is truth and what isnt because its going to be one of the first questions I'll ask God when I die.

 

[Jimmy D]

I'll... disagree. See, the education I had received was very skewed. It espoused that segregation was a good thing. Lincoln was the aggressor from the north who invaded the south when the confederacy just wanted to practice their own independent rights (things such as Alexander Stephen's cornerstone speech were never mentioned). Anything outside of their interpretation of the bible was a lie from satan. In the end, I didn't even get a high school diploma from them, and I had to go and get my GED later on.

I don't blame my parents, as they never really looked too deeply into the curriculum to see how bad it was. They just trusted that the curriculum their church had recommended was good, and they didn't want to see me get into a lot of the trouble that my brother got into while he was in public school. The funny thing was that I ended up getting into a lot of trouble anyways (in many ways, worse trouble), though they still don't know about it to this day.

Judging by your posts it seems that your parents did a good job despite the curriculum. (I hope that that doesn’t sound too patronising).

I find homeschooling fascinating as it’s not such a big thing here in the UK. I’ve looked over some of the “educational” material for children from the likes of Answers in Genesis and it’s not surprising that you would want to explore valid scientific sources. Some of that stuff is pure propaganda and most of it is just plain ridiculous, whether it’s well meaning or not.

 

[JackRT]

But when the very word of God says that the heavens and the Earth were created in six literal days some 6,000 someodd years ago than that's what I'll believe.

But the Bible does not say that. It was Bishop Ussher's particular assumptions that led to his interpretation.

 

[expos4ever]

Deleted own post.

 

[Jimmy D]

You dont really need much of a theory for universal common ancestry, just naturalistic assumptions and organize the evidence around that

Your description sounds like it would be more suitable for creationism. Everything in the bible is to be taken as literal history, just organise the evidence around that and if it doesn’t fit, discard it.

Isn’t that pretty much the various creationist organisations’ mission statement?

On the other hand, I believe Darwin’s ideas were formulated through the observation of nature.

 

[Go Braves]

For the same reason that algebra and chemistry are taught in public schools.

 

[Colter]

Why is evolution taught in our public schools? Should it be? Why or why not? I dont think it should be. I'm not saying creationism should be taught in our public schools even if I believe in creationism and think its a good idea in a perfect world. No Satan doesnt want creationism taught to our children so it will never be. I'm just saying that a theory that hasn't been 100% proven shouldn't be taught in our schools as scientific fact.

I mean around 18 years ago when I was in high school it was taught to me that we evolved from monkeys and it was taught to us as if it was a proven fact. Yet science has proven recently that we didn't evolve from monkeys scientists now think we evolved from something else. Well which is it? If evolution is such an ironclad piece of science than why did scientists get it wrong? When teaching evolution why not say that nobody knows exactly where we came from and that evolution is one theory that explains the origins of life?

I mean to an average scientist evolution has been proven and they deny that a God created the universe and to an average Christian scientist creationism has been proven and it's been proven that not only did a God create the universe but it was their God. Do you see what I'm saying? They can't both be right on the origins of life. Either we evolved or Christ created us. But I still argue that you cannot teach a theory as scientific fact and then when parts of it are proven false then say "It's still scientific fact we just got part of it wrong."

Evolution is taught because its a fact. Genesis was created by the Israelites which is largely exaggeration, speculation and conjecture. If there was a religion class it would be ok to teach the Jews creation story but not in science class.