Teaching creationism or evolution at school?

Teaching creationism or evolution at school?

Which one do you guys prefer?

 

Creationism doesn't really have a place in the academic system.

 

Here we go again. Evolution is SO scientific.

how about just teaching - rapid change theories, young age for earth vs old age evolution theories.

I see evidence of rapid catastrophic change all over the place.

 

Evolution because there is actually some scientific basis to it rather than just rumour and speculation. It's never shrewd practice to teach something based on speculation rather than fact.

 

There are huge amounts of speculation in evolution. Speculation about how they look, etc - do you think they know they were that hairy? That is just an artists representation of cave men, etc.

As a hypothesis it is still under ongoing questioning and redevelopment.

 

Am I to take it that you (alstar70) believe that God created the Earth in 6 days and sat with a mug of cocoa on the seventh day and watched TV? That's interesting.

 

Yes I believe he did, no I don't think he sat with a mug of cocoa and watch TV - I think is would have like spending it with Adam and Eve and telling them about the rocking world he had just created for them. They might have had a few questions as well.

 

Mute point, there isn't a choice, unless you homeschool. Evolution is forced by the government, the teacher will likely lose his/her job if he doesn't go along

 

Non-starter, for me at least. The approach to evolution is through scientific method. The approach to creationism is through faith. While I do not condemn the latter, it flatly has no place in academic life.

 

TEACH BOTH AS THEORIES. Which they both are it is as simple as that.

 

It is simple, but it's not that, Steve, in my opinion.

How does one go about proving a theory?

A theory borne of science, by scientific method. The "theory" of evolution has been rigorously pursued, peer-reviewed, tested, and has, so far, done exceedingly well in explaining nature and its myriad genetic processes.

Ontologically, by philosophical questioning.

Religiously, by ascribing the unknown to faith.

Please tell me - how does one "test" creationist "theory"?

 

Those are inconsequential details. A theory is not a speculation; a theory uses evidence to explain facts while speculation is simply a guess.
A theory of gravity explains the fact of gravity. Likewise, a theory of evolution (Darwinian evolution by natural selection being the most accepted) explains the fact of evolution.
Do you deny the existence of gravity as well?

 

No I refuse to debate this topic with you northpoint. Teaching both is the simple answer which concludes this thread. To dispute the abolition of teaching either would limit the students general knowledge of such topics and most of all it would be like saying ‘Maths or English Literature’ to a certain degree of relevance. Maths is analytic so therefore true, but English Literature is subjective so therefore refutable. It just doesn’t work like that.
Read my ontological argument article on my website in my signature, you will the see how one may as you say ‘test’ such theories.

 

That's fine, I respect your opinion and understand your begging off on the debate.

It seemed you were interested, as you posit both as theories. Theories, to me, at any rate, only hold water if they can be subjected to testing, by methods we all can use. It goes to method. Creationism is wholly without scientific, empirical method; it is therefore no theory, by my use of the word.

I actually have no problem with such questions being raised - and, quite right, ontology is a natural bridge. I simply object to creationism being taught within the context of a course on the origins of life, for example. It isn't science.

 

You are accepting creationism as a theory by the general denotative meaning of the word "theory."
Creationism is unscientific. If we allow creationism to be taught as science, it is appropriate for the teachings of Pastafarianism (the Flying Spaghetti Monster) to be taught in school as well.

 

I also acccept your opinon too. Regards.

 

Let me know when the leaders of churches start considering teaching evolution along with creationism, then we'll talk about teaching creationism in schools.

 

They should teach both at first then somehow let the students choose which one they want to learn about.

I believe evolution is made-up and really has no scientific ground behind it.

I could think up quite a few theories on how there was a world flood (or similar) - but there was a book who knew that it had happened for sure before scientists "discovered" it.

EDIT:

My church does teach about evolution along with islam and other beliefs and religions.

 

This is a difficult queston.

1. Evolution is fiction.

2. creationism will create more religion.

Aliens created life on earth, so none is correct. I think both should be taught.

 

And then both the creationists and the evolution scientific fact based humans want "What the hell?" in one unified voice. Come now, not all live could be alien design - I postulate life evolved as it has and then by the off chance they did come here, they modified the human genetic codes to create slaves to mine resources for them. But all life? Perish the thought - there are billion year old fossils to prove life has been here for a very long time.

Seriously, if you believe the Alien theory - go look up Dr. Zacharia Sitchen. He explains the entire theory and summary of how they created man for their own purposes, and he does so with a lot of interesting facts, archaeological dig sites, ancient writing and ingenious theories that are rather interesting and might be said to be plausible.

But All life? I doubt that very much.