Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is nothing wrong with teaching evolution as a theory, along with creation as a theory. Neither should be taught as proven fact, because both are unproveable.
I do not see any other way of reasonably explaining the biological history of life so I totally agree with teaching evolution as part of a science curriculum.
I object to teaching Creationism or Intelligent Design as anything but another myth in a comparative religion or as delusion in a Psyche class.
There is nothing wrong with teaching evolution as a theory, along with creation as a theory. Neither should be taught as proven fact, because both are unproveable.
Evolution is observable, where as abiogenesis is not.
I do not see any other way of reasonably explaining the biological history of life so I totally agree with teaching evolution as part of a science curriculum.
I object to teaching Creationism or Intelligent Design as anything but another myth in a comparative religion or as delusion in a Psyche class.
And you can't prove that creation is just a myth. Both theories should be presented as just that: theories. Suggesting that those who ascribe to the creation theory are delusional is a bit insulting don't you think?
And there, you see, is the problem. Some believe evolution is a fact rather than a theory of the unproveable.
So changes in DNA and observable traits over time are cannot be proven? Survival of the fittest cannot be proven?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.