31–40 of 113 posts
I find it funny and sad that in 21st century we still have to explicitly prohibit such thing. Up next -- "Tooth faery theory banned from dental schools".
What the majority of the creation supporters don't get is that creationism isn't a science, it's a philosophy. There's nothing constructive or tangible about the theory. You can't test it in a lab, you can't observe it in nature--unless you think irreducible complexity (aka "we don't understand how this could come about, therefore it must be divinely created") is a sound scientific theory. (BTW most of Behe's original examples of "irreducibly complex" biological phenomena have since been reduced.)
I went to a very Christian liberal arts college and creationism was only taught in particular classes like Theories of Origins or theology courses. Biology classes only taught evolution. There might be one day that included a broader survey of creation theories, but that was it.
That being said, both the biology and theology departments were majority evolutionist. Go figure.
I'm divided on these sorts of things (I didn't used to be). Sure science classes shouldn't be teaching religion, but having governments decide what's an approved view for its population is bothersome. People should be allowed to make mistakes and when the parents realise that their kids are at a disadvantage then the parents should learn to gather together and fix it themselves. Encourage people to be active in their…
Why is it bothersome that the goverment decides that it is illegal for schools to teach a lie? Schools are a social(ist) institution put in place by the goverment to ensure people have an equal access to knowledge - a foundation. Schools also have to follow a certain curriculum which would give this foundation. A school cannot simply choose to not teach reading or writing, or teach that the earth is flat because they…
There is no issue with schools deciding it is not in their interest to teach a subject; however, not being allowed to discus a subject is same as book burning.
How about letting schools teach the subject along with skills on how to do proper investigation and scientific research and logical reasoning. In other words, how about teaching the kids how to logically reason through fact or fiction so they are prepared to analyze other subjects appropriately.
Creationism has obviously no foundation in science but neither has evolutionism. Where are the repeatable experiments required in order to be able to look for counterexamples for evolutionism? Has anybody ever "evolved" a species from another? If yes, how can we repeat that experiment? It is clear that evolutionism has no scientific status either.
Creationism has obviously no foundation in science but neither has evolutionism. Where are the repeatable experiments required in order to be able to look for counterexamples for evolutionism? Has anybody ever "evolved" a species from another? If yes, how can we repeat that experiment? It is clear that evolutionism has no scientific status either.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._coli_long-term_evolution_exp...
Creationism has obviously no foundation in science but neither has evolutionism. Where are the repeatable experiments required in order to be able to look for counterexamples for evolutionism? Has anybody ever "evolved" a species from another? If yes, how can we repeat that experiment? It is clear that evolutionism has no scientific status either.
"Evolutionism was a common 19th century belief that organisms inherently improve themselves through progressive inherited change over time, and increase in complexity through evolution. The belief went on to include cultural evolution and social evolution."
And more to the point:
"In modern times, the term evolution is widely used, but the terms evolutionism and evolutionist are seldom used in the scientific community to refer to the biological discipline as the term is considered both redundant and anachronistic, though it has been used by creationists in discussing the creation-evolution controversy. Apart from the use of the word by creationists, it is also often used by theists to imply a worldview that is essentially naturalistic."
Creationism, regardless of its mythological background, still is part of Humanity and any conclusions about it should be drawn by the individual, not the State or teachers.
They'd be better off spending more time with Critical Thinking, Scientific Method and Logic, powerful tools to genuinely understand Religion and not just take "facts" for granted.
Creationism has obviously no foundation in science but neither has evolutionism. Where are the repeatable experiments required in order to be able to look for counterexamples for evolutionism? Has anybody ever "evolved" a species from another? If yes, how can we repeat that experiment? It is clear that evolutionism has no scientific status either.