Originally Posted by Damien (Post 34275498)

Why should schools appease a religion by teaching their version of events? I dont see why people are sensitive to this, religion is a belief and not a fact you cant teach people that. They can ever accept the bible/god or not. You cannot teach it as if it has a equal status to science.

Originally Posted by BBKing (Post 34275497)

P.S. FSM rocks - *high five Ramrod* :tu:

Originally Posted by Ramrod (Post 34275494)

Surely that depends on whether you are a true christian or muslim believer or not?

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 34275498)

One is science though, thats why its taught in schools. Why should schools appease a religion by teaching their version of events? I dont see why people are sensitive to this, religion is a belief and not a fact you cant teach people that. They can ever accept the bible/god or not. You cannot teach it as if it has a equal status to science.

Originally Posted by Ramrod (Post 34275486)

I am a Pastafarian and a believer in the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster and I demand that my beliefs are given equal status alongside other unproven theories in schools! :D

Originally Posted by homealone (Post 34275505)

It depends what you mean by 'teach', imo, we were lucky to have a 'Religious Education' teacher who presented all beliefs equally & invited discussion on the differences & similarities between them, without 'promoting' any one over the other.

Originally Posted by homealone (Post 34275490)

However, in order to form an opinion, it must be possible to access the interpretation of that data on both sides of the debate - so in that respect I believe both scenarios should be discussed in teaching the concept of 'where we come from' ?

However, imo, one should not be promoted over the other, let people make up their own minds, but not in a way that assumes any other opinion thus becomes 'wrong'. :angel:

Originally Posted by Matt D (Post 34275506)

IMO, evolution should be taught in science lessons, & creationism/ID should only ever be taught in RE lessons. Creationism/ID are not science, & are based on belief & faith, rather than evidence & a proper scientific theory.

Originally Posted by danielf (Post 34275523)

So why not include Flying Spaghetti Monsters? Intelligent falling?

I would think it makes sense to make the amount of time spent on any 'theory' proportional to the amount of evidence there is for that theory, not how much noise its proponents make. Ergo, exit creationism. (From Science classes anyway).

Originally Posted by homealone (Post 34275538)

perhaps, but, if the 'amount of noise' theory applied to marketing, where would our advertising business be now? - as for spaghetti monsters, I'm pasta all that ;)

Originally Posted by rogermevans (Post 34275544)

oh dear the world will end evolution will disappear as its so shaky a belief its threated by the mere mention of creationism

Originally Posted by Ramrod (Post 34275486)

.......and this is why, in our household, God is on an equal footing to Amon-Ra, Thoth, Thor, the bogeyman, Santa Clause and the tooth fairy.......Encyclopedia Mythica for further reading :D

Originally Posted by danielf (Post 34275545)

Yes, but were not talking about marketing. We're talking about science education, which should focus on empirical, testable facts and proper, falsifiable theories. Not on theories that are a prime example of how one should not do science.

---------- Post added at 22:56 ---------- Previous post was at 22:43 ----------



Well, personally I welcome well-founded criticism of any scientific theory. What I object to is pseudoscience (which is what creationism is). People can believe whatever they want as far as I'm concerned. Just don't claim it's science (when it's not) and should be given equal status to science, and be taught in science classes.

Originally Posted by homealone (Post 34275566)

I agree that the empirical approach is the foundation of scientific method, but can only say i am waiting for the next big thing, the recent failure at the LHC was a huge disappointment :)

Originally Posted by homealone (Post 34275566)

I agree that the empirical approach is the foundation of scientific method, but can only say i am waiting for the next big thing, the recent failure at the LHC was a huge disappointment :)

Originally Posted by downquark1 (Post 34275581)

Surely the failure at the LHC was an engineering error/oversight rather than a scientific 'truth' issue.

Unless I'm thinking of something different.

Originally Posted by rogermevans (Post 34275544)

oh dear the world will end evolution will disappear as its so shaky a belief its threated by the mere mention of creationism

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 34275592)

Evolution is not threated by Creationism in terms of proof or science. Evolutionists do not think that, logically, creationism can disprove evolution. What we are fearful of is religion and its theory dominating science and pushing science aside in the minds of young children and filling it with a faith.

Children have faith in what they are told by adults, to abuse this position to convert or bring a child to believe in the same religion you do is not on IMO.



Ok, No its not strange. Faith dominates Science. In the end science is made by man using natural resources and methods in order to find out more about the world around us. If you think there is a god, a higher power, that that automatically overrules anything man can say.

What creationists do not understand is that many of us do not have this faith. If you do not have this faith than EVERYTHING the bible says does not effect us. Anything to do with faith we do not have. So the bible, genesis is nothing but a story to us.

Do we believe the story or do we believe evolution that has science and proof behind it? Darwin looked at what he saw around him, In Humans, In Animals in the enviroment. Since then more and more evidence comes forward which proves it. You can see it yourself, its around you all the time. Viruses evolve, the enviroment changes.hat.

Also, Lets get past the idea that (only) some religions try to tell us. Evolution is not animals changing to meet the enviroment, its animals becoming weaker and dying because of the enviroment and only those who survive live on. Humans became more and more like we are today because we were best at living, we have the brain power and our hands to make and use tools which give us an advantage. This meant we were better at hunting, getting food and staying alive.

Removing the element of faith, what advantages does Creationism have over Evolution that deems it worthy of equal mention in teaching