1. Joined
    06 Jul '06
    Moves
    2926
    26 Jan '08 06:33
    this is the topic i got to write about in english, which is great because i talk about daily. i just wanted to post this and see what everyone's opinion here is on evolution being taught in school but not creationism.
  2. Joined
    30 Dec '07
    Moves
    9905
    26 Jan '08 07:17
    Originally posted by EcstremeVenom
    this is the topic i got to write about in english, which is great because i talk about daily. i just wanted to post this and see what everyone's opinion here is on evolution being taught in school but not creationism.
    Creationism is American's stupid people trying to force their religion into young children.
  3. Melbourne, Australia
    Joined
    17 Feb '04
    Moves
    49974
    26 Jan '08 07:47
    Originally posted by EcstremeVenom
    this is the topic i got to write about in english, which is great because i talk about daily. i just wanted to post this and see what everyone's opinion here is on evolution being taught in school but not creationism.
    I don't have a problem with creationism being taught in schools - just not in science classes, since it isn't scientific. (Although, having said that, in some of my science classes we discuss the issues surrounding the rise of creationist thought, what it means and why ...)
    But the simple fact is, it isn't science.
  4. Joined
    29 Dec '07
    Moves
    4184
    26 Jan '08 12:461 edit
    Originally posted by amannion
    I don't have a problem with creationism being taught in schools - just not in science classes, since it isn't scientific. (Although, having said that, in some of my science classes we discuss the issues surrounding the rise of creationist thought, what it means and why ...)
    But the simple fact is, it isn't science.
    Creationism should be allowed to be taught in schools but not as science and certainly not as an alternative to evolution. Maybe in philosophy or religious studies.

    Edit - I've no idea whyy I quoted your post amannion as I was saying basically the same thing. 😕
  5. Joined
    06 May '05
    Moves
    9174
    26 Jan '08 17:07
    Originally posted by amannion
    I don't have a problem with creationism being taught in schools - just not in science classes, since it isn't scientific. (Although, having said that, in some of my science classes we discuss the issues surrounding the rise of creationist thought, what it means and why ...)
    But the simple fact is, it isn't science.
    Exactly.

    If creationism should be taught in science classes, then Russian should be taught in English classes.
  6. Donationkirksey957
    Outkast
    With White Women
    Joined
    31 Jul '01
    Moves
    91452
    26 Jan '08 17:11
    Originally posted by EcstremeVenom
    this is the topic i got to write about in english, which is great because i talk about daily. i just wanted to post this and see what everyone's opinion here is on evolution being taught in school but not creationism.
    I've come to the conclusion that it is more important for kids to learn anatomy, physiology, biology, chemistry and math than evolution and/or creationism. It wouldn't hurt if they learned to read and write as well.
  7. Joined
    06 Jul '06
    Moves
    2926
    26 Jan '08 19:20
    ty for your opinions.
  8. Donationrwingett
    Ming the Merciless
    Royal Oak, MI
    Joined
    09 Sep '01
    Moves
    26187
    26 Jan '08 20:36
    Originally posted by kirksey957
    I've come to the conclusion that it is more important for kids to learn anatomy, physiology, biology, chemistry and math than evolution and/or creationism. It wouldn't hurt if they learned to read and write as well.
    Evolution is an integral part of biology.
  9. Joined
    06 Jul '06
    Moves
    2926
    26 Jan '08 21:15
    Originally posted by rwingett
    Evolution is an integral part of biology.
    do you not think that what goes on so long ago may be very hard to determine w/ 100% efficiency? why cant we just not teach creationism or evolution (also the big bang) and just teach what we know to be going on NOW and not claim we know what happened then? nobody would argue over the issue this way either
  10. Melbourne, Australia
    Joined
    17 Feb '04
    Moves
    49974
    26 Jan '08 21:36
    Originally posted by EcstremeVenom
    do you not think that what goes on so long ago may be very hard to determine w/ 100% efficiency? why cant we just not teach creationism or evolution (also the big bang) and just teach what we know to be going on NOW and not claim we know what happened then? nobody would argue over the issue this way either
    That would be like saying - let's not bother teaching about gravity when studying physics.
    Evolution is a central part of biology, and besides the lunatic creationist fringe, everybody in the real world has no problem with its scientific credentials. So, why not teach it?
  11. Donationrwingett
    Ming the Merciless
    Royal Oak, MI
    Joined
    09 Sep '01
    Moves
    26187
    26 Jan '08 21:57
    Originally posted by EcstremeVenom
    do you not think that what goes on so long ago may be very hard to determine w/ 100% efficiency? why cant we just not teach creationism or evolution (also the big bang) and just teach what we know to be going on NOW and not claim we know what happened then? nobody would argue over the issue this way either
    If we needed 100% certainty about something before teaching it then we'd never teach anything.
  12. Joined
    30 Dec '07
    Moves
    9905
    26 Jan '08 22:17
    Originally posted by amannion
    That would be like saying - let's not bother teaching about gravity when studying physics.
    Evolution is a central part of biology, and besides the lunatic creationist fringe, everybody in the real world has no problem with its scientific credentials. So, why not teach it?
    Is right completely!
  13. Standard memberscottishinnz
    Kichigai!
    Osaka
    Joined
    27 Apr '05
    Moves
    8592
    26 Jan '08 23:53
    Originally posted by EcstremeVenom
    do you not think that what goes on so long ago may be very hard to determine w/ 100% efficiency? why cant we just not teach creationism or evolution (also the big bang) and just teach what we know to be going on NOW and not claim we know what happened then? nobody would argue over the issue this way either
    Creationism and evolution are in no way equal. Evolution is about as certain as say, the sun rising tomorrow, or taxation. We can't be 100% about those things either, but 99.999% does me okay.

    Teach creationism. Teach it in religion class. Teach Christian creationism, and Islamic creationism and Maori, and Aborigine and all the other thousands of other creation stories. After all, if one might be right, any of them might be right.
  14. SubscriberAThousandYoung
    Just another day
    tinyurl.com/y8wgt7a5
    Joined
    23 Aug '04
    Moves
    24791
    26 Jan '08 23:58
    Originally posted by EcstremeVenom
    this is the topic i got to write about in english, which is great because i talk about daily. i just wanted to post this and see what everyone's opinion here is on evolution being taught in school but not creationism.
    Creationism has no scientific value or support. There's no reason to teach it.
  15. Joined
    15 Sep '04
    Moves
    7051
    27 Jan '08 00:101 edit
    I thought the issue was over Intelligent Design, not creationism. Most people who support ID do reject creationism.

    There was a time when these two terms were not interchangeable.
Back to Top