Evolution vs. Creation in schools

[John Dibble]

Creationism is not science and therefore shouldn't be taught in science class, just like evolution is not religion and thus shouldn't be taught in church.

How--neither one is a science

That's not what scientists say about evolution. If you're going to say evolution isn't based on science, then back it up.

science must be observed

Uhm, no. Experimentation must be observed. Science involves more than just experimentation.

[Democratic Hawk]

Both as theory

Dave

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Creationism is not science and therefore shouldn't be taught in science class, just like evolution is not religion and thus shouldn't be taught in church.

How--neither one is a science

That's not what scientists say about evolution. If you're going to say evolution isn't based on science, then back it up.

science must be observed

Uhm, no. Experimentation must be observed. Science involves more than just experimentation.

No--look at any scientific method.  PART of it is experimentatio--but all of hte versions of it have some observation, maybe not visual, but one of the 5 senses.

[ian]

Evolution as a fact, which it is.
In my Geology class, we have to write a report about why "Intelligent Design" shouldn't be taught in schools.  The facts about this thing are ridiculous.  Its creators don't even believe it; they just want an excuse to incorporate extreme right-wing Christianity into schools.  IDers conveniently like to avoid the actual evidence that supports the fact that people evolved from monkeys (ie, fossil records) and that the earth is more than 6,000 years old (ie, geologic time records).

[jokerman]

Evolution as a fact, which it is.

If by fact you mean law, all forms of evolution are certainly not fact.

[memphis]

Evolution as a fact, which it is.
In my Geology class, we have to write a report about why "Intelligent Design" shouldn't be taught in schools.  The facts about this thing are ridiculous.  Its creators don't even believe it; they just want an excuse to incorporate extreme right-wing Christianity into schools.  IDers conveniently like to avoid the actual evidence that supports the fact that people evolved from monkeys (ie, fossil records) and that the earth is more than 6,000 years old (ie, geologic time records).

Indeed, the Right is constantly engaging in academic dishonesty. They argue things in a deliberately misleading way, often in spite of overwhelming evidence. Perhaps, we should "teach the controversy" of whether the earth is round or flat. After all, there are still a few flat earthers out there.

[John Dibble]

No--look at any scientific method.  PART of it is experimentatio--but all of hte versions of it have some observation, maybe not visual, but one of the 5 senses.

You are correct. However your logic does not take into account the full range of experimental types. Evoultion could be studied via extremely long term natural experiments - for example if we managed to catalogue say 99% of the species on the planet we could expect if evolutionary theory holds that new species would evolve over time. If we continued to catalogue species over hundreds of thousands of years we should see new species - more than could encompass the 1% that we missed before - and that these species would be similar to the initial batch in some ways but different in others(and eventually very different if the observations were continued long enough). The point of experimentation in any scientific method is to satisfy the falsifiability requirement - evolution is falsifiable, but to falsify it takes a lot of time.

Evolution theory surely isn't an exacting science like physics, but it is based on empirical observation and data gathering. It's not like someone just came up with the idea based on nothing. The scientific community generally accepts evolution theory as science.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Evolution as a fact, which it is.
In my Geology class, we have to write a report about why "Intelligent Design" shouldn't be taught in schools.  The facts about this thing are ridiculous.  Its creators don't even believe it; they just want an excuse to incorporate extreme right-wing Christianity into schools.  IDers conveniently like to avoid the actual evidence that supports the fact that people evolved from monkeys (ie, fossil records) and that the earth is more than 6,000 years old (ie, geologic time records).

Tell me 1 place on the earth where the geological column scientist created is accurate.

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

Creationism is garbage.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Creationism is garbage.

why?

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

Blatant violation of the seperation of church and state when it comes to education. Now I have no problem with letting students pray in school but I've got issues when christians tryi mposing abstinence or creationsm on school.

[adam]

Creationism is garbage.

why?

I wouldn't call it garbage. But when it breaks down to cold hard truth, creationism is just a story.

[Beet]

Creationism is the truth, but only evolution should be taught because it's the only one which science supports.

[jerusalemcar5]

Does aether theory even retain status as a theory?

Irrelevant to the point he was making I think. All that matters is that it was once a theory in the scientific view. He was saying that there are theories that are not facts, so jcar's statement that theories are basically facts is erroneous.

They basically are facts.  Some of the more extraneous theories of previous times may have been disproven, but Evolution has stood for longer as a theory in modern times and the only evidence coming forth supports evolution.

[GOP = Terrorists]

Young Earth Creationism is garbage.

Corrected it for you.

[John Dibble]

Does aether theory even retain status as a theory?

Irrelevant to the point he was making I think. All that matters is that it was once a theory in the scientific view. He was saying that there are theories that are not facts, so jcar's statement that theories are basically facts is erroneous.

They basically are facts.  Some of the more extraneous theories of previous times may have been disproven, but Evolution has stood for longer as a theory in modern times and the only evidence coming forth supports evolution.

No, theory and fact are quite different. A fact has been verified. Theories are simply ideas constructed in a logical manner to explain what has been observed. A theory can completely explain the occurence of events and seem absolutely logical in it's construction yet be entirely and totally false. Theories can be facts or fiction, but they aren't 'basically facts' by virtue of being scientific theory.

[Speed of Sound]

I prefer my public school teachings to have empirical evidence that at least concludes to a decent likelihood. Sadly, Creationism fails to jump that hurdle, so I have to let it go.