Should Creationism be taught in schools?

A General discussion about everything other than South Park

Moderator: Big-Will

albino.black.sheep
Posts: 1510
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 10:36 pm

Postby albino.black.sheep » Thu May 10, 2007 8:07 pm

Aym_Dand wrote:I have no problem with creationism being taught in schools. I don't see it as a violation of the church/state thing, as LEARNING about what creationism comprises is much different than calling for a shared prayer before class. To dismiss all discussions of Jesus, God, Mohammad et al, is to deprive a student of highly valuable knowledge, which seems to go against the concept of education. That God, Mohammad, Jesus et al might be nothing more than mythologies doesn't matter, because I remember learning Greek and Roman mythologies in school as well. Learning about those things was valuable in understanding Greek and Roman societies, just as understanding creationism, Jesus, God, Mohammad and such are valuable in understanding the world we currently live in.


And all of that should be taught in R.E., which was compulsory for pupils at the school I went to. Which, in hindsight, was the most closed-minded class I've ever been in. I agree that the purpose for being taught religious studies should be to learn about different religions. Unless you're my overzealously Christian teacher who spent three years telling us that euthanasia and abortion are wrong. Not discussion over it, she TOLD us it's wrong. This is why I failed my GCSE R.E. exam on purpose.

I still don't think that creationism should be taught in schools, but it should definitely be kept out of science, which is for teaching the things that are proven and have black and white answers. If creationism is to be taught, it should only be kept to religious studies, with all the other fairytales about talking snakes and human shame being induced from eating an apple.
Email notifications do matter, people.
ShaneHaughey
Posts: 11192
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 8:36 pm

Postby ShaneHaughey » Thu May 10, 2007 10:37 pm

Albino, when I took Science, they taught many thinks that had grey answers at best and "what if?" questions at worst. I agree with creationism shouldn't be forced to be taught, but adding a black and white reasoning to it would actually mean about 50% of all science wouldn't be taught, as it is constantly evolving and scouting out grey areas.
That's how it's down here on the farm!
albino.black.sheep
Posts: 1510
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 10:36 pm

Postby albino.black.sheep » Thu May 10, 2007 10:43 pm

ShaneHaughey wrote:Albino, when I took Science, they taught many thinks that had grey answers at best and "what if?" questions at worst. I agree with creationism shouldn't be forced to be taught, but adding a black and white reasoning to it would actually mean about 50% of all science wouldn't be taught, as it is constantly evolving and scouting out grey areas.


Science is black and white. How many electrons are there in hydrogen; is a question with only one answer. Evolution, right now, is still black and white since the evidence has brought scientists to the same answer. I'm sure it is possible that there are many theories, especially when it comes to the missing link, about evolution, but the curriculum at present only teaches that one version of evolution. I'm not claiming to be an expert, because I f*cking hated science at school.
Email notifications do matter, people.
ShaneHaughey
Posts: 11192
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 8:36 pm

Postby ShaneHaughey » Thu May 10, 2007 10:49 pm

albino.black.sheep wrote:
ShaneHaughey wrote:Albino, when I took Science, they taught many thinks that had grey answers at best and "what if?" questions at worst. I agree with creationism shouldn't be forced to be taught, but adding a black and white reasoning to it would actually mean about 50% of all science wouldn't be taught, as it is constantly evolving and scouting out grey areas.


Science is black and white. How many electrons are there in hydrogen; is a question with only one answer. Evolution, right now, is still black and white since the evidence has brought scientists to the same answer. I'm sure it is possible that there are many theories, especially when it comes to the missing link, about evolution, but the curriculum at present only teaches that one version of evolution. I'm not claiming to be an expert, because I f*cking hated science at school.


There is more to science than evolution and electrons. :lol: Just pointing a flaw in a central line of arguing that attemps to say science only has black and white answers and, as such, these are the subjects that should be taught. There is far too much grey in science to just say "Black and white ftw."
That's how it's down here on the farm!
SuperMaids
Posts: 760
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 4:35 am

Postby SuperMaids » Thu May 10, 2007 10:49 pm

Looky here... i stay away for a few days and miss yet another an apocalyptic flame war between the religious and the athiest fanatics! Well, seems like few of you got my last post , because something on the middle ground in a forum like this is inevitably hated by both fundamentalist factions, so i'll repete myself; Creationism should be taught in Schools, but only in religious lessons, and only as an answer to the question of WHY the universe was created and WHY life exists. If you don't know the difference between the words HOW and WHY, like some (admittedly highly inteligent ) people on this forum; don't worry if you're in that group, not many people see the subtle difference.
Science explains the way in which the big bang (or whatever alternative, less reliable, scientific theory you believe in) made the universe, and how the spontanious formation of single celled life forms from complex biological molicules in the water of the Earth led, over millions of years of adaptation and Evolution, to the myrid of life and culture we see on the planet today.
Sorry about the leangth of this post... a reply to everything really
However, science will never answer the question of WHY these single celled lifeforms struggled to survive, to keep reacting as they were, and to make more of their kind. Non-living chemical reactionsdon't do this, so what does science (praised be it's name) give as the answer for WHY animals fight and kill to preserve themselves, mate to continue their legacy, and why there is a universe in the first place. It's PHILOSOPHY (and by extention RELIGION that answers these questions).
Don't get me wrong again, CREATIONISM SHOULD NEVER BE TAUGHT AS SCIENCE, only explicidly as a metaphore used by early peoples for the creation of the world, and it should be taught, as it is in England where i live, alongside other religions, thinkers and cults theories on the answer WHY we strive to carry on our existance at the expense of others and create more of our kind. If you find a scienific answer to this question, pat your back and call yourself the Holy Name, but don't unless you have an answer.
Another thing to point out (sorry again about the long size of this post; DON'T KILL ME!) is that, while not as dangerous as theists, athiests try to force their oppinions down other's throats and stop religion being ever spoken of are opponents of free speach as much as any religious christian.
As Kyle the skeptic said some time ago, religion didn't cause war; did religion come into it when the Communists and the capitolists were fighting last century? I know it does cause a lot of hatred, but it's the leaders who use religion to brainwash their followers, not the religion it'self, that's to blame (Many dicktators have brainwashed their people with non-religious means, like the Japaniese gov of WW2 [who used honour] and the British gov in WW1 [who used pride] or the chiese communist party [who used their leader's personality] and the NAZIS [who chose any ethnic minority that was an easy target to opress]). If we want to help the world, kill the dictators in it and replace them with peaceful leaders... forcably...
(There's more!) The Holy land would still be a war torn place if one of you athiest twats tried to remove the history, traditions, customs and culture of the area (collectively known as it's religion) becuase it holds the most magical thing on the planet in a vast supply; OIL. On a side note, Athiests will never break the milenia of history among the religious, because some people (d'kno why) like to take after their forfathers and son't want them to have died defending something they'll disrespect (i know it's wrong, and causes feuds and wars, but that's not the point) so they should stop before they embarress themselves.
Image
albino.black.sheep
Posts: 1510
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 10:36 pm

Postby albino.black.sheep » Thu May 10, 2007 11:02 pm

ShaneHaughey wrote:There is more to science than evolution and electrons. :lol: Just pointing a flaw in a central line of arguing that attemps to say science only has black and white answers and, as such, these are the subjects that should be taught. There is far too much grey in science to just say "Black and white ftw."


I know there's more to science than evolution and electrons, they were examples. Pedant.

This thread is about creationism in schools. Schools follow a curriculum according to what exam boards use in their papers. Pupils can only be taught things which are known to be true, to correspond with the correct answers on exams. Science subjects; such as maths, biology, physics and chemistry can only have one answer. Any other answer put down to what is right, would be marked wrong. Hence, my science teacher telling us to leave theories of creationism outside, since "god made us" is different to "we evolved from fish and monkeys" and would be marked as wrong.

I know there are many more theories to science, but teaching theories AND fact at the same time would be too confusing for school kids.
Email notifications do matter, people.
ShaneHaughey
Posts: 11192
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 8:36 pm

Postby ShaneHaughey » Thu May 10, 2007 11:05 pm

albino.black.sheep wrote:
ShaneHaughey wrote:There is more to science than evolution and electrons. :lol: Just pointing a flaw in a central line of arguing that attemps to say science only has black and white answers and, as such, these are the subjects that should be taught. There is far too much grey in science to just say "Black and white ftw."


I know there's more to science than evolution and electrons, they were examples. Pedant.

This thread is about creationism in schools. Schools follow a curriculum according to what exam boards use in their papers. Pupils can only be taught things which are known to be true, to correspond with the correct answers on exams. Science subjects; such as maths, biology, physics and chemistry can only have one answer. Any other answer put down to what is right, would be marked wrong. Hence, my science teacher telling us to leave theories of creationism outside, since "god made us" is different to "we evolved from fish and monkeys" and would be marked as wrong.

I know there are many more theories to science, but teaching theories AND fact at the same time would be too confusing for school kids.


I never said teach theories. I just pointed out that the base logic of your new argument was flawed, not that your base principle is wrong. principle? No creationism in school. We both agree.
Fact is, however, that much of what is taught in science is still grey. So, saying only black and white answers are in science is wrong.
That's how it's down here on the farm!
albino.black.sheep
Posts: 1510
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 10:36 pm

Postby albino.black.sheep » Thu May 10, 2007 11:12 pm

ShaneHaughey wrote:
albino.black.sheep wrote:
ShaneHaughey wrote:There is more to science than evolution and electrons. :lol: Just pointing a flaw in a central line of arguing that attemps to say science only has black and white answers and, as such, these are the subjects that should be taught. There is far too much grey in science to just say "Black and white ftw."


I know there's more to science than evolution and electrons, they were examples. Pedant.

This thread is about creationism in schools. Schools follow a curriculum according to what exam boards use in their papers. Pupils can only be taught things which are known to be true, to correspond with the correct answers on exams. Science subjects; such as maths, biology, physics and chemistry can only have one answer. Any other answer put down to what is right, would be marked wrong. Hence, my science teacher telling us to leave theories of creationism outside, since "god made us" is different to "we evolved from fish and monkeys" and would be marked as wrong.

I know there are many more theories to science, but teaching theories AND fact at the same time would be too confusing for school kids.


I never said teach theories. I just pointed out that the base logic of your new argument was flawed, not that your base principle is wrong. principle? No creationism in school. We both agree.
Fact is, however, that much of what is taught in science is still grey. So, saying only black and white answers are in science is wrong.


OK. I don't want to get into an off-topic argument here. Truce?
Email notifications do matter, people.
ShaneHaughey
Posts: 11192
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 8:36 pm

Postby ShaneHaughey » Thu May 10, 2007 11:20 pm

Sure, why not?
That's how it's down here on the farm!
albino.black.sheep
Posts: 1510
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 10:36 pm

Postby albino.black.sheep » Thu May 10, 2007 11:25 pm

Sweet.
Email notifications do matter, people.
O'Brien
Posts: 549
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 9:05 pm

Postby O'Brien » Thu May 10, 2007 11:33 pm

If you don't know the difference between the words HOW and WHY, like some (admittedly highly inteligent ) people on this forum; don't worry if you're in that group, not many people see the subtle difference.

I don't see how the difference between 'how' and 'why' applies here. Humanity may not have the answer as to why the universe was created, but that does not mean we wil never be able to find out. However we cannot in any way determine 'why' by just writing down a story. Many cultures give conflicting stories as to WHY; do you honestly think that every single piece of fiction that serves as a creation story are valid answers as to why?

You can cut the 'how' and 'why' word game now.

However, science will never answer the question of WHY these single celled lifeforms struggled to survive, to keep reacting as they were, and to make more of their kind. Non-living chemical reactionsdon't do this, so what does science (praised be it's name) give as the answer for WHY animals fight and kill to preserve themselves, mate to continue their legacy, and why there is a universe in the first place. It's PHILOSOPHY (and by extention RELIGION that answers these questions).

Again with these word games and loaded questions. Even if science fails to answer every single question about life, the universe, and everything, it does not mean that methodologies which rely on faith and can't obtain evidence are suddenly more valid. Indeed, any answers that religion might give to our existance will never be satisfactory as long as no quantifiable proof of religion's claims exist. Especially since religions have formed contradictory stories and what not.

If you find a scienific answer to this question, pat your back and call yourself the Holy Name, but don't unless you have an answer.

Well..... care to provide evidence that suggests the existance of Ahura Mazda yet?

Another thing to point out (sorry again about the long size of this post; DON'T KILL ME!) is that, while not as dangerous as theists, athiests try to force their oppinions down other's throats and stop religion being ever spoken of are opponents of free speach as much as any religious christian.

Back up your accusations that atheists are aganist the First Amendment then. I've never heard of this atheist conspiracy before. :roll:

As Kyle the skeptic said some time ago, religion didn't cause war; did religion come into it when the Communists and the capitolists were fighting last century? I know it does cause a lot of hatred, but it's the leaders who use religion to brainwash their followers, not the religion it'self, that's to blame (Many dicktators have brainwashed their people with non-religious means, like the Japaniese gov of WW2 [who used honour] and the British gov in WW1 [who used pride] or the chiese communist party [who used their leader's personality] and the NAZIS [who chose any ethnic minority that was an easy target to opress]). If we want to help the world, kill the dictators in it and replace them with peaceful leaders... forcably...

I suggest you watch this video series then to gain an idea of how religion can spread hate without the aid of a government.

The Holy land would still be a war torn place if one of you athiest twats tried to remove the history, traditions, customs and culture of the area (collectively known as it's religion) becuase it holds the most magical thing on the planet in a vast supply; OIL.

Israel is not an oil-rich country if you bothered to do your homework.

On a side note, Athiests will never break the milenia of history among the religious, because some people (d'kno why) like to take after their forfathers and son't want them to have died defending something they'll disrespect (i know it's wrong, and causes feuds and wars, but that's not the point) so they should stop before they embarress themselves.

Okay, I'm frankly unable to understand what you're trying to say here. Could you rephrase it so it's clearer. :?




EDIT: Damn, you guys are fast! :shock:
Image

Every step back a step foward.
Every failure an extra opportunity for success.
Every day of defeat a victory!
deathandecay
Posts: 264
Joined: Tue May 30, 2006 7:14 pm

Postby deathandecay » Fri May 11, 2007 5:23 am

I believe we go to school for mental and physical educational reasons.

I believe we go to church for religious(creationism) educational reasons.



My answer: Yes. But not for "ZOMG evolution is a fact! A FACT! Its all FAXORZ! Its PROVEN AND GOD DOESNT EXISTZ!! TEACH EVOLUTION IN SCHOOLZ!!" reasons...f*ck those assh*les, i can believe whatever the f*ck i want. And if i wanna believe that an enormous dude created earth with his hands, so f*cking be it.
Nommel
Posts: 2484
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2006 8:37 pm

Postby Nommel » Fri May 11, 2007 6:05 am

deathandecay wrote:I believe we go to school for mental and physical educational reasons.

I believe we go to church for religious(creationism) educational reasons.



My answer: Yes. But not for "ZOMG evolution is a fact! A FACT! Its all FAXORZ! Its PROVEN AND GOD DOESNT EXISTZ!! TEACH EVOLUTION IN SCHOOLZ!!" reasons...f*ck those assh*les, i can believe whatever the f*ck i want. And if i wanna believe that an enormous dude created earth with his hands, so f*cking be it.


You should calm down lol

Oh and yeah evolution is a proven fact. It doesn't conflict with religion in any way.

WHY DO YOU PEOPLE INSIST ON FINDING WAYS THAT SCIENCE CONFLICTS WITH BELIEFS? IT DOES NOT.
O'Brien
Posts: 549
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 9:05 pm

Postby O'Brien » Fri May 11, 2007 6:42 am

deathandecay wrote:But as for cells and organisms creating themselves= No sense. Just like Trey, i think the explination of creationism of "Just cause. There was a big bang and throught millions of years, everything came to be on its own. Just cause." makes no f*cking sense. Look outside, look at the TV show "planet earth"; You really think that came from some random mash-up of sh*t just mixing together?

Again, just because gaps in our scientific understanding of life exist doesn't automatically mean that God always fills the void. As scientists manage to figure out other pieces of the Puzzle of Life, we'll gain a greater understanding of just what brought on life in the first place. While some people may believe that it doesn't make any sense for life to form via random matter, I find it even less plausible to believe a supreme being created life when no scientific evidence for that deity exists.
Image

Every step back a step foward.
Every failure an extra opportunity for success.
Every day of defeat a victory!
deathandecay
Posts: 264
Joined: Tue May 30, 2006 7:14 pm

Postby deathandecay » Fri May 11, 2007 6:55 am

O'Brien wrote:While some people may believe that it doesn't make any sense for life to form via random matter, I find it even less plausible to believe a supreme being created life when no scientific evidence for that deity exists.



And thats where science doesnt really take much part. Its more in the lines of faith that's the reason people believe in a supreme being. But, to each his own. I was just getting heated up over the people who spoon down that creationism by science is a "proven fact and that it should be taught to everyone". Because not everyone believes in it, and shouldn't be forced to. Creation isn't like math where you simply put 2 and 2 together and you have the answer. Thats why i think creationism should just stay in church.

Return to “Off Topic Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest