Britain kicks creationism in the bootay - Page 3

Darth Hulk · #21 (**permalink**) 12-11-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rebal

Actually...yeah.
The idea is that since we haven't discovered our "beginnings" or any type of proof to tell us how the beginnings REALLY started...we have to leave a gap for the knowledge that we don't have yet. So, technically, yes...that leaves room for the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and District Attorney Jack-Me-Hoff or whatever his name is, AND the overgrown Easter bunny who shat out THE carrot...all of those are possiblities to our beginning. Unfortunately...due to time constraints in class...I'd recommend that they only talk about the most common theories (or the newest theories) to keep from discussing this idea for more than 3000 years.

Hell...maybe there should be a 3rd grade project where kids have to "come up with" their own beginning to the universe. I don't know.

I just don't think that you can completely "leave out" all of these theories about the beginning when we don't have a real answer yet. I mean...think about "atomic models". There are like...3 of them that we study that are completely wrong, but we study their "wrongness" to understand the evolution of the "atomic model".

In the same way...Creationism will ALWAYS have a place in science...just as science will ALWAYS have a place in religion. Even if it is considered "the bad guy".

I'd say that there's no need to eliminate those rediculous ideas from the discussion unless there are time constraints. I think all of those other possibilities need to be discussed as well if you think they are equivalent to creationism (which I can't quite understand...but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt). Like I said...there is a gap in our actual knowledge bank...as far as the beginning of the universe. "Popular theories include (but are not limited to) Intelligent Design, The Big Bang theory, the Super fart, and Omnipotent Suicide." So, until we discover the actual truth, we should leave that area of untapped learning as a realm for discussion of many possibilities.

Science will eventually (maybe) be able to give evidence to support ONE of these claims...but currently...it offers none.

Maybe Froggy hit it with this one in saying that it should be under a "Philosophy" heading instead of in the "Science" lab. Either way...I think the footnote should be a little less biased.

Don't you?

Talk about all of those completely unfounded ideas all you want, just not in a science class. The worst thing you can do is to confuse little kids as to what is science and what is not. Creationism is not science and never will be unless someone can offer up some evidence. Until then, you can teach it in a philosophy class or maybe a history class. Otherwise it has no place in school because it is just an idea. Evolution has some scientific backing because there is actually evidence that it is actually what happened. Creationism is borne out of a lack of evidence which basically amounts to people being fearful of the fact that they don't know what really happened. So instead of investigating it, they just made up an answer. That's fine and dandy, but it isn't science. Just like the Flying Spaghetti Monster isn't science. That's why they don't get to play with evolution in the science world.

TMNT

MarkedAchilles · #22 (**permalink**) 12-11-2006

Creationism will not have a place in science ever.

It is something that has started with an answer and looked for evidence to back it up. That is not how science works.

Therefore, it will not have a place in science. It isn't even a theory. It is religious dogma.

General AI · 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cursed Lemon

I theorize that there is a colony of living ham sandwiches at the center of Jupiter.

I second that theory, but I'll add that they are having a secret war with the hamburgers and salads.

This is some pretty good news.

RasputiN · #24 (**permalink**) 12-11-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by KaLi

Science doesn't claim to prove how life began, and creationism should only be taught to people who want to believe in it.

Science everyday is trying to show how life began, but failing. And if creationism should be taught to those that want to believe in it, then why must evolution be taught to everyone, not just the kids that believe in evolution?

Cursed Lemon · #25 (**permalink**) 12-11-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by RasputiN

Science everyday is trying to show how life began, but failing. And if creationism should be taught to those that want to believe in it, then why must evolution be taught to everyone, not just the kids that believe in evolution?

Why should advanced algebra be taught to everyone, not just the kids that plan on, you know...being mathematicians?

KaLi · 10:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RasputiN

Science everyday is trying to show how life began, but failing. And if creationism should be taught to those that want to believe in it, then why must evolution be taught to everyone, not just the kids that believe in evolution?

Simple answer: Evolution is true. It has been proven, and it is undeniable. It doesn't matter if children want to believe in it. Evolution is a fact. Religion has nothing to back it up. Nothing.

Rebal771 · #27 (**permalink**) 12-12-2006

Ok...for clarification...as long as science isn't teaching the kids some type of "beginning" or "theory" that isn't scientifically proven...then we can safely say that these ideas have no place in the lab.

In no way am I saying that the ONLY place to talk about this subject is in the science lab...but I AM saying that if the "beginning" is going to be discussed...then that's when Creationism should be discussed, no matter which class it's in.

Evidence or not...the fact that a single person even mentions "the beginning of time" warrants discussion of Creationism...because it is a very popular, current belief. If you want to keep the "theories without proof" out of the discussion...simply don't open the discussion up for it. Don't talk about the beginning at all...or consider all points until a factual foundation is established.

But trying to keep one idea out of the school while discussing others in the same field is a pretty arrogant and ignorant thing to do, not to mention the harms (prejudice) it causes for kids that are uneducated about a certain idea or belief.

I'm not saying the discussion has to take place...but if it does...all sides need to be represented fairly. And wherever you choose to have the discussion is where the representation should take place.

I think that's fair.

Cursed Lemon · #28 (**permalink**) 12-12-2006

Now why do I need moral support? 8[

Rebal771 · #29 (**permalink**) 12-13-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cursed Lemon

Now why do I need moral support? 8[

Because...you're a sinner.

Actually...I was just trying to make you feel better after you e-girlfriend, Saiyan, was tossed to the curb.

Seems like that's all blown over now, huh?

I'll fix it.

TooMuchButtHair · #30 (**permalink**) 12-13-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by RasputiN

Science everyday is trying to show how life began, but failing. And if creationism should be taught to those that want to believe in it, then why must evolution be taught to everyone, not just the kids that believe in evolution?

Evolution isn't something to 'believed' in - it's a both a fact, and a theory, and that's why it should be taught. It's a fact in the sense that it's been varifiably observed (thus it's founding principles have been proven), and it's a theory in the sense that the theory itself is still evolving as new information is being discovered.

If you want to teach creationism in school, than you open up a can of worms so absurd it's not even funny. Creationism is much akin to saying, 'we want to impose our beliefs onto others, but we want to do so quietly'. Notice how I said beliefs, and not facts. What business do a system of beliefs have in a school system? That belongs in a church. You can't respect everyone's beliefs, and just teach one view of creation. Education in America is already bad enough as it is - the last thing we need is to take more time away from student's studies as it is.

Why the f..k you think that just because scientists haven't been able to figure something out by now, means that they won't ever figure it out is beyond me.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode