Schools should teach creationism?

[MkII]

My point was that these children have been given very little information with which to fight their teachers regarding the facts and so any confrontation is easy to resolve in the classroom.

A child's simplistic understanding is easily defeated. Just because the child isn't equipped to argue to an adult level of detail doesn't excuse rubbishing their source. As has been said, the subject has to be approached with extreme sensitivity.

 

Teachers are the target of this- they love their subject and other people are attempting to demonstrate that science is flawed. In the US (and I'm sure here) children attend summer schools and are 'trained' to chalenge scientists.

Agreed. You'll never stop that though. And why would you want everyone to be the same anyway?

 

We must also remember that this isn't Christianity vs Evolution - teaching Creationism is anti-scientific and you are likely to offend many other religions if you give it time in the science classroom.

It seems trite to want to even mention creationism in a science lesson. I don't see the point - for the teacher. The teacher has to be prepared with good answers to the questions though, and ones that don't offend.

 

to suggest that science has a little evidence that points towards evolution but that no one is really sure is a lie.

We're not stupid, we can apply those theories to other possible answers. Maybe in time science will. It's happened before.

 

We are able to trace and now even alter DIGITAL code within all life... no data goes against a single family tree.

Nothing goes against creationist theory either. It's the way you state the fact isn't it.

 

If you expose the elements on early Earth to radiation you get amino acids - the building blocks of the DNA code within us all.

I've seen this presented as evidence of creation.

 

We are able to observe planets that are millions of light years away and getting further - the simplistic solution that a god created the world a few generations ago is fine if you have a very simple understanding of the world - we don't. I really don't understand why anyone would want to cling on to such an unsatisfying world-view. Schools that say that there are two equal theories (the scientific and the biblical) are not only avoiding the science behind why people have concluded that we evolved they are also missing exactly what science is.

You're quoting an extreme minority who's idea on timespans is a loose interpretation. People ARE willing to use the explanation, even though they were taught evolution first, and accept that other people think differently. You're always going to get extremes of opinion. Most of us would say that those on the periphery are wrong. We sit in the middle and tell them they're wrong and we are right. Like you said, truth is not a democracy. They could be right and we could be wrong.

 

It seems a waste of time though to be discussing extreme minority views as if they have any impact on us. If anything we're giving the viewpoint life by continually discussing it.

[gwendes]

It seems a waste of time though to be discussing extreme minority views as if they have any impact on us. If anything we're giving the viewpoint life by continually discussing it.

 

Extreme minority views are the ones that are affecting children's education right now. You've choosen an interpretation that allows for a creator and requires evolution - that is not a threat to science. I don't agree with it but it isn't a threat.

 

Creationism directly opposes science. It is anti-science and there are already children in classrooms today learning to distrust science because a few people have held onto the idea that the Earth is only a few thousand years old. There being the possibility that science is incorrect is not a reason to teach something which goes against almost every peice of evidence explaining how life on this planet came to be.

 

Where would we draw the line if not at peer-reviewed, substanciated testing and evidence? Science should be left to teach scientific theories based on the best knowledge of the time - what else can it do?

 

I think you're just playing devil's advocate mark- you understand that evolution is as close to fact as is possible to demonstrate and you embrace it as a fact.

 

Would you support any other creation theories being taught in the science classroom?

 

What about alternative maths?

 

I understand the need to be careful - you can't have teachers trampling over religious belief or you'll distance some children from education completely... On the flip-side you can't have anything and everything given equal time or importance, god or whatever, these are not scientific.

 

(I REALLY didn't want to start a new 'Scientology'. Really!)

[gwendes]

(Not that it wasn't a fascinating and thoroughly enjoyable thread)