Should evolution be taught in schools?

[Rían]

Originally posted by Draken
That some scientists subscribe to Creationism is irrelevant. I met an electrical engineer once who didn't understand much about his job. Does that mean that electrical engineers as a profession are flawed? No, it means there are good ones and bad ones, as is the nature of all professions. There have been bad scientists for as long as there has been science, that some now call themselves Creationists changes nothing.

Exactly my point, Draken - I never said that ALL scientists that believe that creationism is the best model were good - I think that some are and some aren't, EXACTLY like th. of ev. scientists.

And I have no "fear of data" or objections to "an explorative and inquisitive mindset". I think many evolutionists do, however, as well as many creationists.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Draken
More interesting to me is why this fear of data, of an explorative and inquisitive mindset, is so prevalent (almost exclusively in the developed world, as far as I know) in the USA - especially it seems in those rectangular shaped states.

I found that to be true too. Must be the shape of states - people get used to "normalcy" and don't like to change. Basically - it's the interior states that are big into creationism and the west and east coasts are more science oriented.

Maybe drawing borders with rulers from an early age inhibits the development of the mind? Someone should do a comparative study with a really crinkly-edged country like Norway!

New Jersey is one of the most irregular shaped states in the country. I like it - it's far less boring than the straight states. We only have the northern section that is connected to New York State that is straight.

[Rían]

I made some clarifications in my long post addressing your points, JD - if you read it already, would you please re-read it if you want to address it? I'm done now. Thanks.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by RÃ*an
Exactly my point, Draken - I never said that ALL scientists that believe that creationism is the best model were good - I think that some are and some aren't, EXACTLY like th. of ev. scientists.

And I have no "fear of data" or objections to "an explorative and inquisitive mindset". I think many evolutionists do, however, as well as many creationists.

My argument is that god has no place in science. You can't have creationism or Intelligent design without god. Therefore those theories are completely based on beliefs - not science.

ALL scientists should be looking for is the truth and completely ignore the question of whether there is a god or not. Science should NOT suppose there is a god (thus creating things) nor should they suppose that there isn't a god.

[Artanis]

Originally posted by Draken
More interesting to me is why this fear of data, of an explorative and inquisitive mindset, is so prevalent (almost exclusively in the developed world, as far as I know) in the USA - especially it seems in those rectangular shaped states. Maybe drawing borders with rulers from an early age inhibits the development of the mind? Someone should do a comparative study with a really crinkly-edged country like Norway!

Haha! I pop in on this thread occasionally and read some posts, and this one caught my eye! Well I don't know about these rectangular shaped states, but I assure you, there are religious people of all kinds in Norway too. Heck, we have the Norwegian Lutheran State Church, and the Prime Minister is from the Christian Democratic Party. He didn't get there by chance! The church is not the big landowner as it was before, but the state still appoints the bishops and higher clergy.

Both religion and evolution are taught in school, which I think is fine. I'm not a Christian myself, I did not marry in church and none of my children are baptised. Still our society stands on Christian moral ground, and Christianity has played an important role in the history of our country. I'm glad my children get to learn about religion, because it helps them to understand other people better and gives them the basic knowledge so they can choose what to believe themselves when they're old enough. I could only wish there would be more room in school for other religions than the Lutheran, like Catholisism and Islam, which are the largest religious minorities here.

No Draken, I don't think this is pointless. I'm thankful that this thread exists, and I like reading the posts here, the only reason I don't read all of them is simply that time is too short. Though it seems clear that no one here will change their mind about evolution/creation, it's still interesting to read your responses. I'm thankful for all of you who use much of your time to produce all this stuff.

[HOBBIT]

We can debate this all we want, but the fact is is that evolution IS SCIENCE and the Creation is a BELIEF. In public schools, evolution with ALWAYS BE TAUGHT - as a theory of course, no one ever dropped the theory - until a new better theory is made. Creation will NEVER be taught in the public school science classroom (unless you have an insane teacher that is). It only has a place in private and/or religious schools, mythology classes.

That is it. Period. End of story. Why is this still going on?

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Have you ever heard of discussion??? Yeesh, are people not allowed to voice opinions, and to just talk about something for the sake of talking about it anymore, Stalin?

[HOBBIT]

You are welcomed to debate what i just said. but what is more simple than creation = belief, religion , no science, not taught in public schools
evolution = science.

I'm NOT SAYING that you AGREE with evolution, just that it IS science by the definition and that Creation (which is ONLY a belief) is not................... are there any of you here who believe that creation should be tauhght i a modern SCIENCE class?

There really is no room to debate this stuff.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Of course you're not saying we agree with evolution. You're saying that we should not debate, as the matter is quite simple and resolved, from your point of view.

[HOBBIT]

You can debate the details of evolution all you want.

The topic is
"SHOULD EVOLUTION BE TAUGHT IN SCHOOL"
The obvious answer YES - unless you are against science. This can be debated all you want.

By the definition of science, the theory of evolution IS science, IS the current best theory, and IS being taught and will continue to be taught? This is a fact people.

Creation by intelligent design is NOT science, it does not belong in a SCIENCE classroom.

Sure, maybe there is a God, but he should not be taught about in school - .

[Cirdan]

Originally posted by Artanis
Both religion and evolution are taught in school, which I think is fine.

Artanis, are they taught in the same class (curriculum)?

In the US they is a big deal about separation of church and state. I don't really understand not being able to teach about it, though: Just not in a science curriculum.

[HOBBIT]

Oh well, *sigh*

I said this stuff should not be debated...but it obviously is being debated for some unknown reason....

why SHOULDN'T it be taught in schools in what I'd like to change the topic to. :P anyone care to discuss.

Go ahead, debate to your hearts content folks. btw, entmoot is not a democracy .

[Gwaimir Windgem]

By the definition of science, the theory of evolution IS science, IS the current best theory, and IS being taught and will continue to be taught?

But you see, it isn't taught as a theory. From all of my experience, it's taught as a fact.

Sure, maybe there is a God, but he should not be taught about in school - .

That's very interesting. Why do you say that?

[HOBBIT]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Gwaimir Windgem
But you see, it isn't taught as a theory. From all of my experience, it's taught as a fact.[/qupte]

That's very interesting. Why do you say that?

Why is that very interesting. How is a supreme being science by any definition? It isn't. It is pure belief. It MAY BE RIGHT. BUt it is not science. even in the CATHOLIC schools around here, creation is taught in RELIGIOUS CLASS, and evolution in SCIENCE CLASS.

There is something here that we call separation of church and state and the freedom to choose our religion - therefore god cannot be taught in public schools. Historically, different religions and their origins are taught in HISTORY CLASS, but they are NOT PREACHED. Certainly creation myths belong in a mythological studies class or religious studies class - those things do not exist here, so oh well. We are not ignorant to religion as most of us were raised either christian or jewish and we were FORCED AGAINST OUR WILL to go to religious school... and also we learn historically the viewpoints of the religions.

Why do you believe fiction should be taught in school? (in reference to god - of course fiction literature is great :P)

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Ah, I see, when you said "in school", you meant "in science class". Naturally, I do agree with that, although I think that creation should be presented as an alternative. But Creationism hasn't had as many scientists trying to make it viable as Evolution has, so it's obviously not as well developed, and thusly would and should not be taught as evolution. Of course, that's assuming that evolutionists didn't believe in automatically dismissing the beliefs of others as unworthy of even a passing glance, and an idiotic idea held only be superstitious fools.

We are not ignorant to religion as most of us were raised either christian or jewish and we were FORCED AGAINST OUR WILL to go to religious school... and also we learn historically the viewpoints of the religions.

This does not necessarily constitute knowing your religion very well. Do you know how many people there are who were raised Christian (many of whom still are, or at the least consider themselves to be Christian), who don't know if Psalms is in the Old Testament or the new? The ignorance of Christianity among Christians is astonishing.

And by the way, that fiction bit was probably the most obvious bait I've ever seen.

[HOBBIT]

ah, well i do agree with you with some things.

Creation SHOULD be an alternative - but it is the parents job to teach that whether it be just telling them or making them go to religious school. It is not the job of the public school and really cannot legally teach it.

Kids should have a choice and make a choice for themselves based on what makes sense to THEM. Not the duty of the public school though.


I respect your other opinions.

Sorry about the bait there :P Its just my opinion though. Try not to get too offended

edit: ah GW, i accidently put this part of my post in response to you in the quote box, so maybe you didn;t see it : "no not really, look at any science text book. It is taught as any other theory is taught - just like gravity, etc. In front of every theory there is no disclaimer: "warning this is only a theory and is only our best explanation that this time" that would be rediculous and you would be reading that a whole lot. You just KNOW its a theory. NOTHING in science is taught as solid fact."

[Rána Eressëa]

Because religious people think Creationism is fact and argue it as so. That's why they want it taught in schools.

[Earniel]

Originally posted by Gwaimir Windgem
But Creationism hasn't had as many scientists trying to make it viable as Evolution has, so it's obviously not as well developed, and thusly would and should not be taught as evolution. Of course, that's assuming that evolutionists didn't believe in automatically dismissing the beliefs of others as unworthy of even a passing glance, and an idiotic idea held only be superstitious fools.

In my experience creationism is bits taken from evolution to fitted together to justify the Bible and gods. The science (as far as creationism has it) has it's place in science classes where it would probably have been taught regardless of creationism. The religious aspects have IMO little place in science classes but should be taught in religionclasses.

[Artanis]

Originally posted by Cirdan
Artanis, are they taught in the same class (curriculum)?

No, but both subjects are mandatory until the children/youths are 16 (I'm not sure about the corresponding level of education in your school system), and those who choose scientific studies the next 3 years must also follow classes where religion is taught. Then, at the age of 19, you'll reach university level where religion is no longer mandatory.

Originally posted by Gwaimir Windgem
But you see, it isn't taught as a theory. From all of my experience, it's taught as a fact.

Well, until very recently, Christianity was also taught as a fact, at least here in Norway. But it really doesn't bother me whether creation/evolution are taught as a fact or not, as long as both are taught. When the children grow up, they'll start questioning things, and they'll form their own opinion. But to be able to form that opinion, they need knowledge on both subjects, and that's what the schools should be able to give them.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Originally posted by HOBBIT
1) Sorry about the bait there :P Its just my opinion though. Try not to get too offended

2) edit: ah GW, i accidently put this part of my post in response to you in the quote box, so maybe you didn;t see it : "no not really, look at any science text book. It is taught as any other theory is taught - just like gravity, etc. In front of every theory there is no disclaimer: "warning this is only a theory and is only our best explanation that this time" that would be rediculous and you would be reading that a whole lot. You just KNOW its a theory. NOTHING in science is taught as solid fact."

1) Think nothing of it, I didn't take any offense.

2) In the text books, perhaps, but my experience has been that the teachers treat it as fact, and almost as history.