how would you feel if a creationist taught your kids science?

[Mini 14]

I would love to here this explained.....

Well I must be getting older than I thought because I thought I did explain it.

If a teacher presumes to teach his/her students that there is no such thing as a Creator or Intelligent Designer, he/she is not teaching science but is teaching religion. And teaching it badly at that. As science. Just won't fly.

I don't care what the teacher's personal beliefs are because they are irrelevent. If creationism or intelligent design has no place in science class, then neither does denial of creationism or intelligent design have a place in science class.

you are using really faulty arguments here. science is based on what can be proven and disproven and as implied by faith god or the role of a supernatural being can never be proven or disproven.

disproving creationism through science is really easy though without having to worry about what a god did or didnt do... examples:

1) creationism requires a earth of only 6k years old... we can see objects millions of light years away
2) the text that describes creationism says that the moon provides ligt which is provably false
3) the same text bred the flat earth theory which we know is false
4) creationism (6k years) also cannot explain even basic geography and natural structures that would require millions of years to develop (e.g. grand canyon)

creationism has no room in science classes period, its simply another creation myth that should be taught with all the others

So something that can be neither proven, nor "disproven," is not "Science?"

Then, by your definition, AGW is a religion (or a myth), right? It should be taught with all the other myths, because it can't be proven or "disproven?"

I am a creationist who believes in evolution. I do not subscribe to the 6k year theory you wish to project upon all those who believe in creation, nor do I consider our breadth of knowledge to encompass all of Science, or religion.

 

[blu]

We don't have to keep it separate, and there's no reason to.

there is no room for myths in science instruction

Really?

Guess we need to get rid of all the "theories". Theory is really just another word for "guess".

LOL what a bafoon you are.

 

[blu]

Well I must be getting older than I thought because I thought I did explain it.

If a teacher presumes to teach his/her students that there is no such thing as a Creator or Intelligent Designer, he/she is not teaching science but is teaching religion. And teaching it badly at that. As science. Just won't fly.

I don't care what the teacher's personal beliefs are because they are irrelevent. If creationism or intelligent design has no place in science class, then neither does denial of creationism or intelligent design have a place in science class.

you are using really faulty arguments here. science is based on what can be proven and disproven and as implied by faith god or the role of a supernatural being can never be proven or disproven.

disproving creationism through science is really easy though without having to worry about what a god did or didnt do... examples:

1) creationism requires a earth of only 6k years old... we can see objects millions of light years away
2) the text that describes creationism says that the moon provides ligt which is provably false
3) the same text bred the flat earth theory which we know is false
4) creationism (6k years) also cannot explain even basic geography and natural structures that would require millions of years to develop (e.g. grand canyon)

creationism has no room in science classes period, its simply another creation myth that should be taught with all the others

So something that can be neither proven, nor "disproven," is not "Science?"

Then, by your definition, AGW is a religion (or a myth), right? It should be taught with all the other myths, because it can't be proven or "disproven?"

I am a creationist who believes in evolution. I do not subscribe to the 6k year theory you wish to project upon all those who believe in creation, nor do I consider our breadth of knowledge to encompass all of Science, or religion.

haha the king of logical fallacies strikes again with AGW

but yes until science can prove AGW its a myth

 

[SmarterThanHick]

But my question to the OP is how would you feel if an atheist taught your children about Science? Or a person that so firmly believes science has all the answers as to be a form of religion?

Science is not a religion.

A scientist leaves open room for all manner of theories, ideas, concepts, speculation, and even beliefs so long as such is not presented as 'settled science'. Only the most close minded would suggest that there is no way a supernatural being was involved in the process when there is no scientific method by which such a statement can be made.

It should not be taught as science, but any teacher who denies creationism or intelligent design has no business teaching science at all.

Well, yes and no. Any scientist who denies something that can't be investigated, or acknowledges it as a possibility, is not doing their job correctly. The correct answer to "is creationism a possible explanation?" is "there's no way to tell." Saying either yes OR no are both wrong. In religion, only those two options exist. In science, "I don't know" is encouraged where applicable.

 

[AllieBaba]

What would Jesus do?

Jesus would tell us to put aside worldly wisdom for spiritual wisdom, and stop arguing over minutia. It's all a part of God's creation and plan. The more we understand, the more we should see that.

 

[syrenn]

"13 percent of biology teachers back creationism"

13 percent of biology teachers back creationism - Technology & science - Science - LiveScience - msnbc.com

Personally, if it was shown that they refused to teach actual science in the classroom I would work to have them removed and their teaching license revoked. If they separated their beliefs and their teaching then its all good.

So long as they teach the science without a peep about religion, i really dont care what they believe in.

If a science teacher refuses to teach science based on their religion they should find a different line of work. They are not teachers they are preachers.

 

[California Girl]

there is no room for myths in science instruction

Really?

Guess we need to get rid of all the "theories". Theory is really just another word for "guess".

LOL what a bafoon you are.

Scientific theory is an explanation or model based on study, observations, experimentation, and reasoning. It is used to describe one that has been tested and confirmed, but many accepted scientific theories have, with further study, been found to be shit.

We really need to recognize the difference between scientific theory and scientific facts. Often, the left state theory as fact. A theory is not a fact. And that's a fact.

 

[rdean]

Douche, believing in God does not preclude teaching science, or believing in science.

Many mathematicians are Christian, too. I suppose you would support a sweep of the schools, like the commies and nazis are fond of doing?

Math doesn't threaten "mystical and occult" beliefs.

 

[rdean]

"13 percent of biology teachers back creationism"

13 percent of biology teachers back creationism - Technology & science - Science - LiveScience - msnbc.com

Personally, if it was shown that they refused to teach actual science in the classroom I would work to have them removed and their teaching license revoked. If they separated their beliefs and their teaching then its all good.

Unfortunately, the right wing has been teaching the country for years. They have taught you don't need an education because it's "just a piece of paper". They have taught the world to laugh at their insulated and dangerous ways. They have taught they don't understand how the world works. The evidence is the threats to throw us out of an entire part of the world. The evidence is the disaster that is Iraq. The evidence is the economy and the tens of thousands of Americans dead and wounded.

The good thing - they apologized.

The bad thing - it was to BP.

 

[AllieBaba]

Douche, believing in God does not preclude teaching science, or believing in science.

Many mathematicians are Christian, too. I suppose you would support a sweep of the schools, like the commies and nazis are fond of doing?

Math doesn't threaten "mystical and occult" beliefs.

Math is the basis of genetics and most other sciences, rtard.

 

[AllieBaba]

"13 percent of biology teachers back creationism"

13 percent of biology teachers back creationism - Technology & science - Science - LiveScience - msnbc.com

Personally, if it was shown that they refused to teach actual science in the classroom I would work to have them removed and their teaching license revoked. If they separated their beliefs and their teaching then its all good.

Unfortunately, the right wing has been teaching the country for years. They have taught you don't need an education because it's "just a piece of paper". They have taught the world to laugh at their insulated and dangerous ways. They have taught they don't understand how the world works. The evidence is the threats to throw us out of an entire part of the world. The evidence is the disaster that is Iraq. The evidence is the economy and the tens of thousands of Americans dead and wounded.

The good thing - they apologized.

The bad thing - it was to BP.

 

[rdean]

"13 percent of biology teachers back creationism"

13 percent of biology teachers back creationism - Technology & science - Science - LiveScience - msnbc.com

Personally, if it was shown that they refused to teach actual science in the classroom I would work to have them removed and their teaching license revoked. If they separated their beliefs and their teaching then its all good.

Unfortunately, the right wing has been teaching the country for years. They have taught you don't need an education because it's "just a piece of paper". They have taught the world to laugh at their insulated and dangerous ways. They have taught they don't understand how the world works. The evidence is the threats to throw us out of an entire part of the world. The evidence is the disaster that is Iraq. The evidence is the economy and the tens of thousands of Americans dead and wounded.

The good thing - they apologized.

The bad thing - it was to BP.

You think that's crazy? You haven't read the right wing threads on this board. That's the problem with the right. There is no introspection. No self awareness. They a bulls in a China shop.

 

[rdean]

Douche, believing in God does not preclude teaching science, or believing in science.

Many mathematicians are Christian, too. I suppose you would support a sweep of the schools, like the commies and nazis are fond of doing?

Math doesn't threaten "mystical and occult" beliefs.

Math is the basis of genetics and most other sciences, rtard.

Gawd you people are dumb. Go read the available curriculum at most Bible Colleges. They don't teach "science". They teach "natural science". High school stuff. Bees pollinate plants and why plants have chlorophyll.

The foundation science for biology, botany and physiology is evolution. In depth science is simply not taught. Anything related to "old earth". Including geology, plate tectonics, astronomy, obviously evolution and so on is either barely touched on or not taught at all. I've posted to these Bible Colleges many times, including the larger ones such as Bob Jones University.

You really should back up some of your words with proof. Any kind of proof except "Bible quotes". Those are not proof. Those are "fables".

 

[SmarterThanHick]

Scientific theory is an explanation or model based on study, observations, experimentation, and reasoning. It is used to describe one that has been tested and confirmed, but many accepted scientific theories have, with further study, been found to be shit.

We really need to recognize the difference between scientific theory and scientific facts. Often, the left state theory as fact. A theory is not a fact. And that's a fact.

Actually I think YOU need to recognize the difference between scientific theory and fact. I doubt you know the difference, as you seem to be referring to a scientific theory as a hunch, which it's not. Gravity is an example of a scientific theory.

Can you tell me the last scientific theory that has been tested and confirmed, and proven wrong later? I don't mean "scientific theory" like the idea of a flat earth from hundreds of years ago that had no actual scientific basis. I'm talking about a theory that adheres to today's standards of that term.

 

[Intense]

"13 percent of biology teachers back creationism"

13 percent of biology teachers back creationism - Technology & science - Science - LiveScience - msnbc.com

Personally, if it was shown that they refused to teach actual science in the classroom I would work to have them removed and their teaching license revoked. If they separated their beliefs and their teaching then its all good.

No problem, if the Teacher is qualified to teach Science. Is this a Witch Hunt or just a Tar and Feathering?

 

[Intense]

Scientific theory is an explanation or model based on study, observations, experimentation, and reasoning. It is used to describe one that has been tested and confirmed, but many accepted scientific theories have, with further study, been found to be shit.

We really need to recognize the difference between scientific theory and scientific facts. Often, the left state theory as fact. A theory is not a fact. And that's a fact.

Actually I think YOU need to recognize the difference between scientific theory and fact. I doubt you know the difference, as you seem to be referring to a scientific theory as a hunch, which it's not. Gravity is an example of a scientific theory.

Can you tell me the last scientific theory that has been tested and confirmed, and proven wrong later? I don't mean "scientific theory" like the idea of a flat earth from hundreds of years ago that had no actual scientific basis. I'm talking about a theory that adheres to today's standards of that term.

The flow of electricity. Magnetism in relation to polarization. We do stumble as we go, but you do already know that. How about CO2 as a Pollutant???

 

[IanC]

as an atheist I have no problem with religion being taught, just not in science class

 

[Intense]

as an atheist I have no problem with religion being taught, just not in science class

Total agreement.

 

[elvis]

"13 percent of biology teachers back creationism"

13 percent of biology teachers back creationism - Technology & science - Science - LiveScience - msnbc.com

Personally, if it was shown that they refused to teach actual science in the classroom I would work to have them removed and their teaching license revoked. If they separated their beliefs and their teaching then its all good.

same way an evangelical feels about health classes teaching birth control.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

Scientific theory is an explanation or model based on study, observations, experimentation, and reasoning. It is used to describe one that has been tested and confirmed, but many accepted scientific theories have, with further study, been found to be shit.

We really need to recognize the difference between scientific theory and scientific facts. Often, the left state theory as fact. A theory is not a fact. And that's a fact.

Actually I think YOU need to recognize the difference between scientific theory and fact. I doubt you know the difference, as you seem to be referring to a scientific theory as a hunch, which it's not. Gravity is an example of a scientific theory.

Can you tell me the last scientific theory that has been tested and confirmed, and proven wrong later? I don't mean "scientific theory" like the idea of a flat earth from hundreds of years ago that had no actual scientific basis. I'm talking about a theory that adheres to today's standards of that term.

The flow of electricity. Magnetism in relation to polarization. We do stumble as we go, but you do already know that. How about CO2 as a Pollutant???

None of these are scientific theories. Yes, we do stumble as we go along in our pursuit of truth, but concepts put forth by scientists, especially controversial topics, should NOT be confused with scientific theory.