Why teach creationism in public school science classes?

[Arikay]

How about I start a thread about different types of creationism, and what problems they have. Thats much easier for me becuase it requires less writting.

would you be willing to listen to that?

I am not qualified to do a thread like that. I don't have any information on paper. Most of it was just picked up here and there from reading about it.

I don't spend alot of time studing that part of science. I would prefer to keep on track with my bible studies, since that has changed my life in a drastic way. In other words, I prefer to study the truth.

But I would really appreciate it if you started a thread on evolution, all its theorys, wether right or wrong, or crazy.And all the evidence to go along with it. This way I will know for sure.

 

[SUNSTONE]

I can come up with a whole load of things that hasn't been disproven. Disprove there aren't UFOs, vampires, or werewolves.

However, again, you need evidence to support claims. There is no evidence to support the YEC version of creation. There's plenty of evidence to support evolution. It is real and it is verifible and anyone can test it.

Lastly, evolution didn't "make" everything. Once again, evolution only explains the diversity of life on Earth. NOT where it came from. It could've came from a god, or aliens, or the Matrix, or whatever. This has been said so many times, this is the reason I firmly believe you guys have zero desire to actually learn.

It's really a shame. The universe is a fascinating place filled with wonders waiting to be explored and understood. It's sad that people like yourself keep your mind in a bottle.

If you have seen the things I have seen, and done you would be some what closed up too. I am not closed to science, at all. But I guess I have debated with alot of die hard evolutionists that say we all came by chance. But after talking to you guys, it appears that this is not the case.
You basicly don't know, and you are letting science do its thing.

But what I would like to see, is the fact that evolution doesn't prove where we came from, more emphasised in schools. Plus the thoery of creation, in schools. Saying basicly that its not proven neither, but alot of people, the majority in fact believe in creation. And state some of the scientific laws, like the big bang, as theorys that could be associated with creation.

 

[SUNSTONE]

How about I start a thread about different types of creationism, and what problems they have. Thats much easier for me becuase it requires less writting.

would you be willing to listen to that?

Go for it.

 

[Arikay]

Ok, scratch that, it would only be about a 6000 year old YEC view, but thats good enough I guess.

 

[Kyubi-no-Youko]

I went to school, and I remember them teaching evolution. I also read the enyclopedia of evolution. And in it, it defended both evolution and creation. Saying that neither is proven or disproven.
I have heard two professors debate this same arguement. Both said it required faith to believe what they believed.Both thought it took alot of faith, in the opposite of there beliefs, at the same time saying it took a little leap of faith to believe what they believe.

The encyclopedia of evolution? I've never heard of that. Than again, I haven't heard of every book in the world. Lol. XP

Creation and Evolution are two seperate things. Evolution, and the Theory of, doesn't even touch creation. If anything, it says that something had to be created for it to ivolve. I doesn't say how or why something was created. That's a whole other bag of laundry.

Of course neither is proven or disproven. They are scientific theories. Like the Theory of gravity ^^

Evolution does go against creation, because it believes that everything happened by chance.

No, it doesn't. Where are you getting your facts? Again...Evolution can't go against creation because without it (whether it was caused by some entity or not) there would be no evolution. Evolution does NOT explain creation/the Origin of life.

Creation has been falsified, oh really, did you discover this yourself, mr. scientist. Please do tell your reasoning,your beliefs, your faith.

I said CreationISM has been falsified. Not Creation. And you obviously didn't read my post in full. I said I'm no scientist...at least I think I did. And I didn't discover it...Scientsts who developed hypothesis' and theories and evidence and did all the junk with the Scientific method did. That's my reasoning. I trust logic and facts. As for my faith...well, I'm a Agnostic...at least I think I am. Someone told me it means you could go either way. Meaning if God is disproven beyond doubt I'll accept it and if He/She/It's proven beyond doubt I'll accept it. Or any other enity for that matter. In other words, I'm in the middle. I think. XP

And while your at it, explain to me how everything came about through evolution,and the proof that you have. I can tell you right now your wasting your time, because if it was proven, then those professors, and books wouldn't say what they say.

Of course it hasn't been proven. First off, ToE doesn't say everything came about from Evolution. It is a THEORY. Theories aren't proven or disproven.

So something like a human being which is more complicated than man can dream of inventing, just happened by chance, but yet there has never been a car made by chance, ever, ever, ever. never. ever. Not even a simple watch. You can't even find a simple row of trees, that wasn't planted that way on purpose.

You are assuming the make up up a human is a complicated thing. I'm certain I read somewhere that the genetic make up for a human is as UNcomplicated as that of algee (sp?) I'm not sure where I read it, though...but I remember it. I'll post a link if I find it. And as it has been stated, Evolution doesn't occur by chance. And do compare it to a car being made by chance (though you never know..many made made things have been discovered my accident. Like various foodstuffs) is like comparing yogurt to a VHS tape. It can't be done. I don't see where you are going with this arguement, as it has nothing to do with evolution.

And you know for a fact that every tree in the world was planted (and replanted) in a certain place on purpose by a Creator? Should we stop trying to protect this Earth and let what will come come? Certainly we shouldn't have to worry if God is controlling everything. ^^

Oh...and it is possible to believe in God and evolution at the same time. You can do it to ^^

Think of it this way. God made everything...then let it/guided life to evolve into what it is today.

Tell me...you said you learned about evolution in school. Micro or Macro evolution? Or both?

 

[Cantuar]

What do you mean prayers and visions aren't testable? If I pray for things to happen, and they happen, that is evidence. If I have a vision of the future and it happens, that is evidence.

No, it isn't evidence, it's hearsay. It's your personal experience and it can't be replicated under controlled conditions or repeated by another observer. I could say that I asked the Invisible Pink Unicorn to make it rain, and it did, so the IPU exists and is capable of controlling the weather. Makes every bit as much sense.

You also find that when prayers are requested for a sick child and the child recovers, that's claimed as proof that God exists, but if the child doesn't recover, that somehow isn't proof that God doesn't exist, because it was God's will that the child shouldn't recover. In other words, whatever happens, along with its exact opposite, is claimed as evidence for God. These things aren't proof or evidence, they're personal experience and opinion, and that isn't part of science.

 

[Cantuar]

So now we have one theory being taught in schools, but not the other.

"God did it as set forth in the Bible" is not a theory. Before you start lecturing people what should and should not be taught in science classes, why not find out what a theory is. There are scientific claims that have been made on behalf of young-Earth creationism, but they've been falsified in spades (and that started even before Darwin happened along). However, you don't seem at all interested in the scientific claims of creationism, you just want to qute the Bible at us. Quoting the Bible is not part of the scientific method.

I am not qualified to do a thread like that. I don't have any information on paper. Most of it was just picked up here and there from reading about it.

I don't spend alot of time studing that part of science. I would prefer to keep on track with my bible studies, since that has changed my life in a drastic way.

So, on the one hand, we have millions of scientists who accept the theory of evolution and big-bang cosmology and old-Earth geology - and on the other hand, here you are dismissing it all without having bothered to really find out about it. You'r easking someone to start a thread and walk you all the way through the theory of evolution when you already have that attitude about it? You don't want to learn about evolution, you're just hoping to gain some converts to Christian fundamentalism.

 

[AV1611VET]

My question for creationists in this forum is: Do you believe that creationism should be taught either with or in place of evolution in public school science classes?

No -- I believe two things:

1. Creationism should be taught as history, not science.
2. Macroevolution should not be taught at all.

 

[Hespera]

If you have seen the things I have seen, and done you would be some what closed up too. I am not closed to science, at all. But I guess I have debated with alot of die hard evolutionists that say we all came by chance. But after talking to you guys, it appears that this is not the case.
You basicly don't know, and you are letting science do its thing.

But what I would like to see, is the fact that evolution doesn't prove where we came from, more emphasised in schools. Plus the thoery of creation, in schools. Saying basicly that its not proven neither, but alot of people, the majority in fact believe in creation. And state some of the scientific laws, like the big bang, as theorys that could be associated with creation.

But what I would like to see, is the fact that evolution doesn't prove where we came from, more emphasised in sch

ools.

No need to restrict this to evolution. Very little can be proved except in math. In court, they try to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. The defense seeks to falsify the prosecutions case.

Science is basically the same. The theory is good as long as it works, and cannot be falsified. ToE has been proven far far far beyond any reasonable doubt.

nobody has ever found a way to falsify it; if it were wrong, that should be easy.

do you have a reasonable doubt?

Plus the thoery of creation

do you understand why creation(sim) is not a theory?
Plus the thoery of creation

majority in fact believe in creation

Sure, and the majority used to think the world is flat. Im guessing, world wide, the majority still does. One of my friends grew up in rural philippines; she has a college degree now but she used to think the world was flat.


do you understand why creationism isnt a theory?

 

[Greg1234]

ools.
Sure, and the majority used to think the world is flat. Im guessing, world wide, the majority still does. One of my friends grew up in rural philippines; she has a college degree now but she used to think the world was flat.


do you understand why creationism isnt a theory?

Data shows that the world is not flat. Data shows intelligent design and refutes Darwinian evolution. Tread lightly.

 

[Tomatoman]

Data shows intelligent design and refutes Darwinian evolution. Tread lightly.

...for I tread on your dreams. Sorry, mate, your dreams are horse manure. It's time you woke up.

 

[knowledgeIsPower]

Data shows that the world is not flat. Data shows intelligent design and refutes Darwinian evolution. Tread lightly.

ROFLMAO

 

[Hespera]

ROFLMAO

Intelligent design is very brittle and delicate. Any vibration shatters it.

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

Better question: why is it illegal to teach any scientific hypothesis other than Darwin's Victorian Age hypothesis of evolution to account for human origins in public school biology class?

 

[Delphiki]

Better question: why is it illegal to teach any scientific hypothesis

It's not illegal. All you need is another scientific hypothesis.

other than Darwin's Victorian Age hypothesis of evolution

It's a scientific theory. But I'm pleased to see you've picked up on the definition of a theory. It's also quite different now than when Darwin did his studies. But I wouldn't expect you Hovindians to understand that.

See, Galileo supported the heliocentric view 400 years ago. Does that mean the geocentric view is correct?

to account for human origins in public school biology class?

Bring up a plausible scientific hypothesis, and I'm sure it will be discussed in a public classroom. Save the made-up religious garbage, like the creation story, for private schools. Thanks.

 

[AV1611VET]

It's a scientific theory. But I'm pleased to see you've picked up on the definition of a theory. It's also quite different now than when Darwin did his studies. But I wouldn't expect you Hovindians to understand that.

Speaking of understanding -- interesting word choice there.

Not 'wrong' -- just 'different' ?

 

[Upisoft]

Speaking of understanding -- interesting word choice there.

Not 'wrong' -- just 'different' ?

That's how science works. Like war. Ancient people knew how to kill each other with bows and stones. Our knowledge is much more advanced and thus different than theirs. Did they knew about nuclear bombs? No. Did Darwin knew about DNA? No.

Does that make the ancients incorrect? No. The were killing people just fine.

 

[knowledgeIsPower]

Better question: why is it illegal to teach any scientific hypothesis other than Darwin's Victorian Age hypothesis of evolution to account for human origins in public school biology class?

It isn't illegal. It just has to be science. Needless to say "goddidit" doesn't qualify.

Neither does your "Saturn was a sun here look at these old writings and pointless quotes" approach.

 

[CaliforniaSun]

Not 'wrong' -- just 'different' ?

Correct.

It's a common mistake made by Hovindians, as molecular genetics is quite complex and requires a lifetime of study to fully understand, that we are 152 years beyond Darwin's origins, yet his theory has yet to be falsified.

 

[Greg1234]

dreams

Yes, you are dreaming aren't you.