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.
Why should non-science like creationism be taught in science classes?
That is like asking whether Spanish should be taught in French class.
I would be open to scientifically valid alternatives to the theory of evolution being taught.
Why should a theory like "evolution" be taught exclusively?
Why do you think creation science is not science? Who are you to determine what science is and what it is not? Anything that seeks the truth of origins of the universe (and man) through the study of what can be seen to exist is a science. You are not free to determine that such a study starting with the premise that God created all things is not science, and a study that starts with the premise that man "evolved" from some other form (pond slime?), is science. You still have to answer the basic question of the origin of the universe itself, which you cannot do.
Since "evolution" is a lie, and cannot be proven (it is just a "theory" and a ridiculous one at that), it should not be taught as fact.
A theory and a scientific theory are 2 different things. Here is a link if you are interested. Gravity is a scientific theory also, do you argue that is not real either? We should teach facts and scientific theories in science classes.
What 'alternative' scientific theories to evolution are there?
Creationism and it's rebranded version "Intelligent Design" are not scientific theories, they are religious beliefs.
I wonder how many people are still trying to argue that religious myths should be taught in a science class? In the 21st century.
Is not "evolution" a religious belief? Why in the 21st Century are we still trying to prove that man evolved from something else? Why is that called "science," and the study of the universe starting with the premise that there was "intelligence" involved and not just "chance" is not science?
It would seem that in the 21st Century we would be more open to scientific discovery and not simply accepting one man's flawed theory that man must have "evolved" from some other life form, the origin of which can not be explained without assuming there was some "force" that created it. No?
From everything we know about the physical world, including the universe in which we live, and how all things are dependent upon one another (it's really unfathomable), to think there was no intelligence involved is a very narrow view, and quite frankly, a ridiculous one.
A theory and a scientific theory are 2 different things. Here is a link if you are interested. Gravity is a scientific theory also, do you argue that is not real either? We should teach facts and scientific theories in science classes.
Well, then we should not teach evolution, because it is not fact, is not provable as fact, and it is not even a "scientific theory" because there is no science that can establish it as fact. It is an opinion based on nothing scientific. One man writes a book that sets forth a theory of origins (no science involved) and we have been trying to make a science out of proving that theory ever since.
If we can use science to try to prove "evolution" (an assumption) why can't we use science to study the universe and the origins of life from a different perspective (the assumption of intelligent design; i.e., a "creator)?
Why is it okay for one side to call it science, and not the other?
Why should a theory like "evolution" be taught exclusively?
Why do you think creation science is not science? Who are you to determine what science is and what it is not? Anything that seeks the truth of origins of the universe (and man) through the study of what can be seen to exist is a science. You are not free to determine that such a study starting with the premise that God created all things is not science, and a study that starts with the premise that man "evolved" from some other form (pond slime?), is science. You still have to answer the basic question of the origin of the universe itself, which you cannot do.
What would a creation science curriculum look like, what scientific facts would it contain. So you start with God creating all things, then what?
Why should non-science like creationism be taught in science classes?
That is like asking whether Spanish should be taught in French class.
I would be open to scientifically valid alternatives to the theory of evolution being taught.
there are two main streams of though, science and faith. the universality of faith and belief in intelligent creation is found in the most remote regions as well as civilized countries. So why not teach about the evolution of thought and show where current science departed. consider that evolution and intelligent creation can coexist. Unfortunately the liberal world only sees issues in absolute terms. In fact if only evolution is taught, the students are being deprived of critical and creative thinking. their parameters strictly defined and cutoff from the influence of imagination, the source of all progress.
Recently the theory of chaos has been set aside with different mathematical models that show disticnt predictable patterns to what was chaotic.
So most of the world believes in intellgent design rather than interpretated science. The more info we get from scientific study, the closer it takes us to the confluence of science and faith and the stream of consciousness it creates.
Science does not exist without challenge and is only true for a moment. What we hear is the interpretation os scientific findings, which like art critics, can be seen from many different perspectives.
We teased out threads of knowledge tobetter understand a piece of the whole cloth and based our education system on teaching isolated information. now there is an awareness that perspective and realtionship to the world has tobe included to make focused study more useful. We are discovering science and faith are one.
Why not assign the class to write a paper that debunks evolution and see what you get. Seems there is more evidence these days for intelligent design than there is for evolution theory.
Study the physiology of man and animals from macro to micro and you get a glimpse of the most facinating creation that cannot be random. that does not eliminate evolutionary changes once created.
Many of the top scientists now believe in intelligent creation. Embrace the concept of education and creative thought and leave the victorian rigidity that has dominated our education system, guarded by teacher's unions that want to keep a late 19th century edu strategy.
This is only for public schools funded by tax payers. Should anything other than evolution be taught in science classes? I. E. Intelligent design, creationism, etc.
Is not "evolution" a religious belief? Why in the 21st Century are we still trying to prove that man evolved from something else? Why is that called "science," and the study of the universe starting with the premise that there was "intelligence" involved and not just "chance" is not science?
It would seem that in the 21st Century we would be more open to scientific discovery and not simply accepting one man's flawed theory that man must have "evolved" from some other life form, the origin of which can not be explained without assuming there was some "force" that created it. No?
From everything we know about the physical world, including the universe in which we live, and how all things are dependent upon one another (it's really unfathomable), to think there was no intelligence involved is a very narrow view, and quite frankly, a ridiculous one.
We get it. You feel your religious beliefs are threatened by science and that scares you.
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.
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.
