Evolution and Intelligent Design:Both Taught in Public Schools?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
please don't take the U S out of JESUS

would you put Jesus in jail

for practicing medicine without a license
 
"Teach ID in a theology classroom and evolutionary biology in the science classroom."


Are you saying science can prove evolution without a doubt?

A done, sealed, in the science fact?


The eye of an eagle watches for something called faith.
 
ID in either a theology or philosophy class. It doesn't belong anywhere else, sorry.
 
the iron horse said:
"Teach ID in a theology classroom and evolutionary biology in the science classroom."


Are you saying science can prove evolution without a doubt?

A done, sealed, in the science fact?


The eye of an eagle watches for something called faith.
Evolution is a scientific fact and it is also a scientific theory.
 
"Evolution is a scientific fact.."


Please post the facts on the origin of matter and life.


My view is that whatever we believe on this topic is a matter of faith.


I believe God created all, but I have zero science, just faith.

...and a few reasons that make me think this way :)
 
the iron horse said:
"Evolution is a scientific fact.."


Please post the facts on the origin of matter and life.


My view is that whatever we believe on this topic is a matter of faith.


I believe God created all, but I have zero science, just faith.

...and a few reasons that make me think this way :)

But is that enough to teach in school?:eyebrow:
 
the iron horse said:
"Evolution is a scientific fact.."


Please post the facts on the origin of matter and life.


My view is that whatever we believe on this topic is a matter of faith.


I believe God created all, but I have zero science, just faith.

...and a few reasons that make me think this way :)
This is not a question about the origin of life (a field in which much study is being done), it is a question of evolution. We have mountains of evidence for evolution from both our knowlege of paleontology right through to genetics. New species arise as conditions change, complex mechanisms on all levels driving natural selection, information being passed down through genes ~ altered through mutation and sexual reproduction.

You would be hard pressed to argue a case that life on earth is static and it would be impossible to use the scientific method to deduce that God created it because a deity is unfalsifiable and thus unscientific. Science is all about the scientific method to explain the facts. Evolutionary biology fufils this very well, intelligent design (by nature of having an unknown and probably undefineable creator) does not.
 
the iron horse said:
Are you saying science can prove evolution without a doubt?

A done, sealed, in the science fact?

The eye of an eagle watches for something called faith.

Science has something called "inherent uncertainty"; that is, when the original Theory of Gravity was disproven, it was then rewritten to reflect contemporary knowledge.

The illogic of creationism and ID is that it considers itself an "alternative theory," as long as the current Theory of Evolution is "disproven." No, if the current Theory of Evolution is found to be wrong in part, it will be rewritten into a different Theory of Evolution. What we know for sure is this:

Creationism and ID have no scientific basis. They are religious tenets that belong in a religion class.

Melon
 
melon said:
Creationism and ID have no scientific basis.

Only to the extent that (i) science will not consider the concept of God and/or (ii) such concepts are beyond our ability to understand through scientific theory.
 
I dont understand why if macroevolution can be taught as fact in school when its not proven, then the alternative side cant be taught as well.
Shouldnt kids be given a choice?
Why are people so afraid to allow this?
As somebody who believes in microevolution but also creationism, should I have been forced to attend classes that taught something that went directly against what I believe in?
 
ID is philosophy, not science. I was a philosophy minor in college. There's nothing wrong with the ID approach, it's just that it doesn't belong in a science class.
 
nbcrusader said:
Only to the extent that (i) science will not consider the concept of God and/or (ii) such concepts are beyond our ability to understand through scientific theory.

No, it's because science only approaches subjects that can be observed and tested or may be observed and tested. "God" cannot be observed and tested in the concrete realm. It has no place in science class.

Would you support watering down math class with religious precepts? I hear the Bible says "pi" is 3.2, which is wrong.

Melon
 
u2bonogirl said:
I dont understand why if macroevolution can be taught as fact in school when its not proven, then the alternative side cant be taught as well.
Shouldnt kids be given a choice?
Why are people so afraid to allow this?

Shintoism holds that the Earth was created with a gigantic penis. Shall we consider that an "alternative theory" for evolution?

No. Creationism and ID aren't even in the realm of "theory," which is a strict scientific definition. Creationism and ID go into the realm of "guessing" with no proof. It has no place in science class. Period.

As somebody who believes in microevolution but also creationism, should I have been forced to attend classes that taught something that went directly against what I believe in?

Yes. There is value in understanding mainstream academic knowledge. I took a class in microeconomics that was nothing more than a propaganda class for supply-side economics. Should I have been forced to attend a class that taught something that went directly against what I believe in? Yes. Now I am very well-informed about where supply-side ideology comes from, and I'm able to formulate intelligent criticisms of it.

Melon
 
Last edited:
melon said:


Shintoism holds that the Earth was created with a gigantic penis. Shall we consider that an "alternative theory" for evolution?

No. Creationism and ID aren't even in the realm of "theory," which is a strict scientific definition. Creationism and ID go into the realm of "guessing" with no proof. It has no place in science class. Period.



Yes. There is value in understanding mainstream academic knowledge. I took a class in microeconomics that was nothing more than a propaganda class for supply-side economics. Should I have been forced to attend a class that taught something that went directly against what I believe in? Yes. Now I am very well-informed about where supply-side ideology comes from, and I'm able to formulate intelligent criticisms of it.

Melon

I think what I gained from attending that class was a stronger belief in what I had believed in to begin with :shrug:
I also got publicly taunted by my teacher for not believing in what most of the rest of the class believed in. There were a few others but they were too ashamed to speak up :|

I think Ive abandoned all belief now for the schlong theory :D
 
u2bonogirl said:
I think what I gained from attending that class was a stronger belief in what I had believed in to begin with :shrug:
I also got publicly taunted by my teacher for not believing in what most of the rest of the class believed in. There were a few others but they were too ashamed to speak up :|

Well, it is science class. As long as you don't intend to have a career in biology, then it really doesn't matter if you disagree with evolution, ultimately. But now you know what science believes when it comes to the creation of life, and there is some value in that.

I still greatly believe that it would be a huge mistake to taint science with religious tenets. It would be a disaster.

Melon
 
melon said:


Well, it is science class. As long as you don't intend to have a career in biology, then it really doesn't matter if you disagree with evolution, ultimately. But now you know what science believes when it comes to the creation of life, and there is some value in that.

I still greatly believe that it would be a huge mistake to taint science with religious tenets. It would be a disaster.

Melon

Theres no way Im going into science. Im too bad at math :rolleyes:

I guess I see more reason in creationism than the big bang or darwinism, or anything like that.
Even if I didnt believe in God I think I would still find more reason in it.
 
u2bonogirl said:
I guess I see more reason in creationism than the big bang or darwinism, or anything like that.
Even if I didnt believe in God I think I would still find more reason in it.

I believe in God, and I think it makes infinitely more sense than creationism does. When I see such mathematical order in "chaos," it's a lot more beautiful to me.

Melon
 
I think that ID/Creationism has no place in school at all. I think it is up to the parents of children to teach about creationsim, at home. If your doing your job as good parents, your kids should believe you more than some pin-head biology teacher. Its up the family to enoforce beliefs, not schools.
 
nbcrusader said:


Only to the extent that (i) science will not consider the concept of God and/or (ii) such concepts are beyond our ability to understand through scientific theory.
Nobody in the history of the world has been able to come up with an empirical test for the existence of God, hence as an element God is unfalsifiable and therefore having God or any unfalsifiable being in the equation makes it unscientific.
 
my own personal belief is that god created evolution, and that the creationism story is symbolic for what really happened. so, i accept both the scientific and religious theories. however, my own personal belief is that if people want to learn creationism, go to sunday school.
 
Back
Top Bottom