:::OshnSoul:::

Expanding students' horizons in making their own decisions on what they believe is what I strongly support and I am glad someone is making the move, even if it produces contreversy, which is innevitable. After clicking the link, click on the "Evolution Debate" video.....
http://video.msn.com/video/p.htm?t=1...4-d37a5667449b

joeshoe

I say, if they want to teach creationism, so be it.

Charlatan

There is no place for creationism in public schools. I see no need at all to debate this.

If there is a question about evolution as a theory... great. Let's discuss. Let's discuss ad nauseum.

Lessons in Creationism has a place and that place is a church.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

ravenradiodj

I agree 100%, Charlatan.

thefictionweliv

...

SecretMethod70

Many religions have <a href="http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/2027_statements_from_religious_orga_1_26_2001.asp">spoken out</a> in regards to this. Most recognizing that strict creationism should not be taught in schools.

__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

CSflim

I long to see the day when creationism is taught in the classroom as a quaint anthropological curiosity.

__________________

JJRousseau

This always seems to degrade to a religious vs non-religious argument. But if you can put aside for the moment... Why censure one theory over another. I realize that the Biblical account of Creation is difficult to accept, but the current theory of Evolution has many holes as well. Until it can be proven that the universe did not begin as an Act of Will, why not offer it as a possibility. To do otherwise, is to deny children the right to think for themselves.

<flame away>

welshbyte

Make the kids aware of all ways of thinking, show them the proofs and holes in each theory and let the kids make up their own (damn) minds what they believe in.

If i was writing this with a pen, the last full stop (period) would have gone straight through the paper. Indoctrination in schools is something i cant stand, whether its for or against my own way of thinking.

__________________
There are only two industries that refer to their customers as "users". - Edward Tufte

filtherton

Creationism isn't a theory, it is something one must take on faith, and if we're going to start teaching faith based creation stories as fact we should make room for the creation stories of all faiths, not just the christian ones.

ShaniFaye

I think if you're gonna teach one, you need to teach both....students need to understand that not everyone believes one or the other....its more of education both sides of the coin in my opinion

__________________
I want the diabetic plan that comes with rollover carbs. I dont like the unused one expiring at midnite!!

filtherton

But if you're going to teach creation stories, you can't legally just stick to the christian one because that would amount to state endorsement of a specific religion over another. You'd have to teach the hindu creation story, and you'd have to teach the muslim one, and you'd have to teach the moonie one. You'd just be opening a huge can of worms.

ShaniFaye

I've long thought that education children world religions would be such a good thing, as well as teaching evolution and ummm Im not sure what you'd call it....but where they would be educated on atheism and agnostics as well....but Im one of those geeks that studied it all on my own so that I would be able to ask the people in the world that I meet from various religions intelligent questions.

but thats just me....like I said Im a geek

__________________
I want the diabetic plan that comes with rollover carbs. I dont like the unused one expiring at midnite!!

SecretMethod70

School should give time to serious educational considerations. When most Bible-based religions reject creationism beyond the simple idea that God is behind creation, not to mention all the people who don't adhere to a Bible-based religion going to school in a public setting, it is clear that creationism is a fringe religious belief with little basis and should not be taught in public schools. The majority of religions have no problem coping with evolution being taught in schools - they say "yeah, and God was behind that." As for those who do have an issue with it, when objective evidence beyond the mere fact that we exist can be shown, then schools should consider teaching it. As it stands, all "objective evidence" that I've read in regards to creationism is, no offense to anyone here who may believe it, crack-pot science.

If people want to lobby for schools to be teaching any aspect of creationism, it should not be focused on science classes but, rather, on classes adressing world religions, such as an OPTIONAL class dedicated to studying the ways in which various different religions view creation.

__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

ShaniFaye

SM agreed with me? well color me black and call me a sharpie cause Im gonna circle this day on the calendar ha ha ha

__________________
I want the diabetic plan that comes with rollover carbs. I dont like the unused one expiring at midnite!!

SecretMethod70

well there's nothing wrong with optional classes that study religions from an objective standpoint - plenty of schools have those. Teaching creationism in science classes, which is what the majority (if not all) creationist lobbyists want, wrongly causes it to appear that there is some scientific basis for it, which there isn't.

__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

JJRousseau

firtherton, I'm not sure if you actually read my post, but I specifically removed any reference to Christianity or any denomination. Creationism is a theory (defined as speculation, ideal, belief, hypothetical set of facts, conjecture, unproved assumption) that we exist thru an act of will. I make no judgement as to who's (or what's) will that is or how that will came to create us.

coash

OT:
How can God create day and night before the sun

coash

actually stuff that...i thought this was the only topic about this. looks like the whole forum is about it.

Suave

While I think it is good to teach creationism versus evolution, primary and secondary school children are too young to be exposed to that kind of controversy. They generally take what they learn in school as hard fact, and introducing both will just result in confusion. Creationism should be left out because, if it is purely the direct Christian version, it is probably wrong, and has no scientific method applied to it. I think they're good topics for discussion in certain post-secondary classes though.

1010011010

I don't know why I would expect MSN to support anything other than Internet Explorer or Windows Media Player...

So, what's the gist of the video?

I think it depends on what you think the purpose of a highschool science education is supposed to be. If you think it's purpose is to teach kids to think about the world skeptically and analytically... ignoring the fact that schools generally fail at this anyway, creationism offers a good example of how people can put together a convincing sounding bit of sophistry by exploiting common misunderstandings.

By discussing creationism you can teach kids how to think critically, and point out the exact misconcept being exploited... and so ensure the kids have the correct concept and maybe prevent them from being taken in by similar scams.

The only real danger is people getting the mistaken impression that creationism is anywhere near an equal footing with actual science.

__________________
Simple Machines in Higher Dimensions

Tophat665

Now that's disingenuous at best. When is the last time you heard about Buddhists against Darwin, or Fundamentalist Muslim Parent groups wanting to put warning stickers on books that teach evolution? It boils down to a question about teaching Christianity in schools because people who call themselves Christians (many or most of whom are actually neo-Pharisees) are the ones who keep bringing it up. Or is the Ba'hai lobby in on this now too?

__________________
Light a man a fire, and he will be warm while it burns.
Set a man on fire, and he will be warm for the rest of his life.

MSD

My anthropology class got a nice 6 hour block (across two classes) covering various theories about how we came to be. Basically, the professor told us that evolution is not a perfect theory, and doesn't explain 100% of what happens, but that combined with other factors, it fits almost perfectly and satisfies Occham's razor (simplest answer is probably right.) Basically, the course material allowed us to make the logical conclusion that creationism, while still a widely held theory, does not make nearly as much sense as evolution/natural selection. Other theories like punctuated equilibrium and catastrophism were given equal time and debunked accordingly.

joeshoe

Even if creationism were taught in schools, it probably wouldn't be Bible-based, at least not openly. Most likely it'd be like intelligent design, where no particular religion is endorsed.

Suave

As I understand it, creationism is by definition the strict belief in the Adam and Eve, Garden of Eden, seven day theory.

hannukah harry

so you'd be okay if they also taught my theory that the world was created by dropping out of the anus of a giant pink and purple polka dotted unicorn with a bad case of jock itch?

but it's not the state taking a stance about religion. it is teaching the scientific communities current theory on our origin. creationism and intelligent design are not 'theories' is only one sense of the word. they're stories, they're ideas, not unlike conspiracy theories. no evidence so they can't be proved, and unfortunatly can't be disproved. i don't hear anyone complaining that teaching theories about how the sun functions and stars form is establishing a state stance on religion by not saying that they work because god said so.


unfortunatly not all students (age/maturity dependent) are able to differentiate between a real theory and a fictional story. creationism has to be taken on faith because there is no evidence for it. how can you teach something with no facts and no testable hypothesis possible in a public school? these two issues are not opposite sides of the same coin. they're two different coins, and they're not even the same currency.

i would have no problem with a comparative religions class teaching various religious beliefs and their origin stories. but keep it out of the science class rooms. evolution has been observable. while it's workings are not 100% known yet, there's much more evidence for it than for creationism. a lot (evolution) to none (creationism).

__________________
shabbat shalom, mother fucker! - the hebrew hammer

welshbyte

We had religious education classes in school for... 3 years, i believe. We touched on religions from anglican christianity to judaism to sikhism to ancient egyptian gods. Surely they must do that in every school??

Come to think of it, my R.E. teacher was a bit biased in the direction of christianity which spoiled things but it was enlightening nonetheless

Afterthought: Thats right, it was the first 3 years of high school with an option to take it for another 2 years to get a GCSE qualification in it. I took sciences instead.

__________________
There are only two industries that refer to their customers as "users". - Edward Tufte

prosequence

I believe that both creationism and evolution have the same right to be taught in schools. Both are theories, none more proven than the other.
Yes, Christianity should be more focussed on, for it applies a large part of the population. It would be like teaching evolution without mentioning Darwin. Yes there are hundreds of theories for both, but why not focus on hte major ones?
Should both be taught in Science? No, I don't think EITHER should. They are belief based, not science based.

Hannukah ---- "so you'd be okay if they also taught my theory that the world was created by dropping out of the anus of a giant pink and purple polka dotted unicorn with a bad case of jock itch?"
--- this is an example of evolution, not creation.

__________________
And now here I stand because of you, Mister Anderson, because of you I'm no longer an agent of the system, because of you I've changed...

flstf

I think most scientists will agree that life forms on this planet have been and are evolving. Therefore evolution of life on planet earth should be taught as our current best explaination of how this diversity has come about.

Just because we do not understand all the details of how this occurs is no reason to assume there is an intelligent designer behind it, much less require it be taught as a scientific explaination. Life on planet earth may be a school project, an experiment set up by a student from an advanced civilization or any number of other designer theories. This type of thinking belongs in a philosophy class and not a science class.

IMHO, teaching intelligent (or unintelligent) design is not much different than teaching that the Tower of Babel is the reason for the world's many diverse languages.

SecretMethod70

No, American high schools do not have mandatory religious studies classes. Some, like mine did, do have some optional classes though.Not true, there is a TON of physical evidence for evolution. There is absolutely none for creationism. As National Geographic states in its November 2004 issue ("Was Darwin Wrong?"): (Sorry, that's all I can quote since Academic Search Elite has a 3 month delay for getting the full text of articles online I think you get the point though)Excellent parallel

__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

filtherton

I'm not sure if you read your post. You specifically mentioned the biblical account of creation. Furthermore, i highly doubt that most creationists are fighting for the right to teach hindu creation stories in their public schools. I would wager that most of them would abhor the idea of teaching curriculum that seemed to imply that other religions are just as valid as christianity.

Evolution is a theory, that means it is supported by experiment and observation. Creationism is not a theory, it is not supported by anything, it belongs in an anthro class, not a hard science class. There are holes in evolution just as there are holes in newtonian physics, but overall they seem like a pretty damn good explanation. Unlike any creationism story, which is completely untestable.

Anyone who insists that creationism belongs in the same group as evolution in terms of tested validity please e-mail me because i have some magic beans to sell you.

zen_tom

So, the video describes how a sticker has been placed in the front of the Science books stating that evolution is a 'theory'. Isn't it sensible to put similar stickers in the front of all the bibles that says 'This book is allegorical' - I don't see what the fuss is about.

However, doesn't it remain illegal to teach creationism in schools as part of the science curriculum?

:::OshnSoul:::

I honestly think it would be effective to have a general class in which all religions and beliefs could be discussed in a free manner, w/o it being mandatory. I don't think children should be brought up blind-folded or set to one way of believing, but that they shouldn't be forced upon anything either. We all have choices in what to believe and it doesn't mean it has to be debated or for kids/parents to get offended when it is just showing the many windows of life.
Ya know what used to be okay in society years ago is not okay now or it's considered "wrong" all because someone decided to take offense- why? Because it goes against their beliefs. In this time we are not afriad to speak up, but the problem is we speak with negativity and blame and seperation. Just because some teacher discusses creationism & evolutionism does not mean it's being forced upon students. People's opinions and beleifs always change, therefore we should be able to see by now that protesting and taking offense to what is presented to us isn't working.

1010011010

My gut response to prosequence's post is to say "Go on, pull the other one."

Evolution is a change in the genetic structure of a population over time. Such changes are known to actually occur. They have been observed. Evolution is a fact.

Thus, we can study known instances of evolution, and see what sort of telltales evolution leaves behind. Thus, when we find these telltales in a population that has not been under constant observation, we can say that these telltales are evidence that the population evolved... because, by observing evolution in action and how it affects the genome, we have established a standard of evidence. We can say if a given piece of information is evidence for, or against, evolution.

On the other hand, we have no standard of evidence for creationism. Thus, it is impossible to claim anything as evidence of creation... or evidence against. It is not science, and it has no evidence. It cannot have any evidence.... because creationism has provided no basis for identifying evidence for or against it.

Intelligent design is in basically the same boat as regular creationism... though I suppose someone could formulate a sufficiently rigorous definition of "intelligent design" to establish a standard of evidence by examining human artifacts. I have a feeling no one has done this publically is because they'd find no evidence of intelligent design in living things... and possibly evidence against. Which means all you'd do is show it to be a false theory, or a practically useless one.

__________________
Simple Machines in Higher Dimensions

Charlatan

I don't think anyone would really have an issue with a class that examines world religions.

The problem is when creationism is taught as *the* truth or *the* theory for "where we came from"...

World religion, where a class explores the various religions of the world would be exceedingly useful.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

hannukah harry

i won't respond to the main part of your post here since others already have and as far as finding sources (like that national geographic article secretmethod started to post) and unfortuanlty can't get into the read nitty gritty (genetic evidence and what not), i'll have to let people better versed in the details to discuss that stuff.

but my unicorn theory is a good example of creationism. not evolution. creationism is a belief that the world came about by and act of god. in my example, the supreme being (a unicorn with jock itch) decides to crap the earth out. how exactly would that be an example of evolution? or do you believe that the greek creation myth of the gods being born out of someone's head and creating the earth (i think that's the greek one, could be wrong) is also an example of evolution.

__________________
shabbat shalom, mother fucker! - the hebrew hammer

1010011010

Athena burst forth form the forehead of Zeus. He had a bit of a headache and later an adult female in full armor came out. Cured up the headache, though.

Also, the Earth wasn't created, exactly. IIRC, the Earth is a stillborn god.... the dead sister of Zeus.

__________________
Simple Machines in Higher Dimensions

prosequence

A ton, really, and it would be what?

__________________
And now here I stand because of you, Mister Anderson, because of you I'm no longer an agent of the system, because of you I've changed...

prosequence

I thought the Unicorn thiing was more evolution, you know, something evolving from something else. Creation is the belief that God created the world and those within.

As far as some of the other arguements, I don't know, I never saw monkey turn into a human, nor a g-string thingy turn into briefs.

But I do not wish to argue, so maybe we should agree that there is such a thing as evolution, which of course was created by God. Why not.

__________________
And now here I stand because of you, Mister Anderson, because of you I'm no longer an agent of the system, because of you I've changed...

welshbyte

Thats what makes the whole argument so weird. The two schools of thought are not parallel. One is a general "how did the earth and the universe come about?" answer and the other is specifically a "how did the humans and other species on earth come about?" answer.

By the way prosequence, i hope you dont think evolution involves monkeys turning into humans just like that. It occurs by the monkey having a baby which is slightly different to itself. Multiply that by millions of generations over millions of years and the original monkey is a lot different to the modern day baby. Also by the way, it was apes, not monkeys...
(Not arguing, just educating)

__________________
There are only two industries that refer to their customers as "users". - Edward Tufte