Should We Teach Creation As Science In Public Schools?

[SassyIrishLass]

Faith shouldn't be taught in schools. Period.

Yeah instead let's teach the kiddies all about, "climate changey" homos, transgenders, there are a gazzilion different genders etc, etc .....how's that working out? A generation of messed up indoctrinated loons are the result.

Give them options

The natural selection evolution experiments of Gregor Mendel can be reproduced in advanced High School or beginning college biology courses with either plants, or more commonly, with fruit flies. . .


Now, if you want to suggest someway we can have a reproducible AGW experiment? I am open to observe that?

Evolution of man is all well and good...too bad that pesky missing link is so elusive though

Good thing they found it huh?

Fossils discovered in South Africa are the 'missing link' in human evolution, study finds

This leads us to a question of what IS the missing link? We have fossil evidence all along the evolutionary progression. I'm not sure what folks are referring too when this is brought up anymore.

For me, it has always been. . . . .

What caused the explosion of culture. What differentiates modern man from his ancestors? Why all of a sudden did all the tech go Super Nova?


Civilization flourished, not in just one area of the globe, but many, simultaneously, at once. (ON a geologic time scale of course.) But why?


Personally, I think this USA Today piece has it all wrong. The missing link was never between the Australopithecines and the Hominids. It has to do with what caused the creative communal consciousness among the Hominids. It definitely occurred AFTER the neanderthals. On this, Sassy is closer to the truth.

. . . but, it remains an elusive mystery.


Why did modern humans create civilizations? What was that fruit of knowledge, what was the loss of innocence?

Last year I saw a great debate between high school debate teams on it. It got really heated and was fun to watch

 

[OldLady]

Faith shouldn't be taught in schools. Period.

Yeah instead let's teach the kiddies all about, "climate changey" homos, transgenders, there are a gazzilion different genders etc, etc .....how's that working out? A generation of messed up indoctrinated loons are the result.

Give them options

The natural selection evolution experiments of Gregor Mendel can be reproduced in advanced High School or beginning college biology courses with either plants, or more commonly, with fruit flies. . .


Now, if you want to suggest someway we can have a reproducible AGW experiment? I am open to observe that?

Evolution of man is all well and good...too bad that pesky missing link is so elusive though

Good thing they found it huh?

Fossils discovered in South Africa are the 'missing link' in human evolution, study finds

This leads us to a question of what IS the missing link? We have fossil evidence all along the evolutionary progression. I'm not sure what folks are referring too when this is brought up anymore.

For me, it has always been. . . . .

What caused the explosion of culture. What differentiates modern man from his ancestors? Why all of a sudden did all the tech go Super Nova?


Civilization flourished, not in just one area of the globe, but many, simultaneously, at once. (ON a geologic time scale of course.) But why?


Personally, I think this USA Today piece has it all wrong. The missing link was never between the Australopithecines and the Hominids. It has to do with what caused the creative communal consciousness among the Hominids. It definitely occurred AFTER the neanderthals. On this, Sassy is closer to the truth.

. . . but, it remains an elusive mystery.


Why did modern humans create civilizations? What was that fruit of knowledge, what was the loss of innocence?

Excellent questions.

 

[progressive hunter]

If you're not willing to give them the option you are

I mean fact should only be taught in school. Fact isnt indoctrination

Evolution of humans isn't "fact"...toss it

Our species is Homo sapiens sapiens. One of the long extinct species on our planet that had once interbred with our species, whom some white Europeans have DNA in their genome, is Homo sapiens neanderthalensis.

So, when you say, "pesky missing link is so elusive," I'm not really sure you know a whole lot about physical anthropology.

Neanderthals: Facts About Our Extinct Human Relatives | Live Science

Europeans are closer to Neanderthals than first thought | Daily Mail Online

The fact is that no matter how hard they try "scientists" can't connect the missing links in human evolution. That's just factual

the fact is that no matter how hard they try evangelicals can't provide any evidence of a god. That is just a fact.

and they openly admit that and call it faith not fact

 

[alang1216]

Creation science is backed by the scientific method, so it should be taught in schools. Part of the problem is science today only accepts what is natural in the physical world. It is based on the philosophy of empiricism, but today's science does not follow it nor is it backed by the scientific method. What today's science of evolution is backed by is consensus and circumstantial forensic evidence. Why only evolution is taught in schools is because today's science does not allow for a supernatural creator to be involved in the "creation" of the universe, Earth, and everything in it. This is not science when evidence can be provided for the supernatural in creation through the Bible. It is part of Genesis and how God created the natural world. The assumption that there was no supernatural occurrence during the beginning is unscientific. One of the most basic arguments for a creator is the universe began to exist, not an eternal universe, and we have Kalam's Cosmological argument.

Furthermore, we are here -- the universe and everything in it exists! Now, if evolution and its big bang could explain in detail of how the electromagnetic spectrum, the Higgs field, the cosmic microwave background, and how amino acids formed into proteins in outer space from nothing or invisible quantum particles, then they would have a better explanation and argument with big bang. We need to have the theory fit the evidence instead of the evidence made to fit the theory. Science should not just be based on empiricism, but also on a priori reasoning in addition to the scientific a posteriori reasoning. This is all part of epistemology. We need to use facts, reasoning, and historical truths in science since not everything can be proven by scientific method.

I've read Dr. John Morris' explanation for a creator -- Should the Public Schools Teach Creation? -- and today we have a more updated version from Lee Strobel -- Strong case, but flawed by compromise (Review of Lee Strobel, Case for Creator) - creation.com. creation.com gives a brief overview without reading his book. Sorry, I haven't read his book, but have watched the video below.

No, we should not be teaching creationism as science. It is just a 'God of the gaps' fallacy.

 

[progressive hunter]

Creation science is backed by the scientific method, so it should be taught in schools. Part of the problem is science today only accepts what is natural in the physical world. It is based on the philosophy of empiricism, but today's science does not follow it nor is it backed by the scientific method. What today's science of evolution is backed by is consensus and circumstantial forensic evidence. Why only evolution is taught in schools is because today's science does not allow for a supernatural creator to be involved in the "creation" of the universe, Earth, and everything in it. This is not science when evidence can be provided for the supernatural in creation through the Bible. It is part of Genesis and how God created the natural world. The assumption that there was no supernatural occurrence during the beginning is unscientific. One of the most basic arguments for a creator is the universe began to exist, not an eternal universe, and we have Kalam's Cosmological argument.

Furthermore, we are here -- the universe and everything in it exists! Now, if evolution and its big bang could explain in detail of how the electromagnetic spectrum, the Higgs field, the cosmic microwave background, and how amino acids formed into proteins in outer space from nothing or invisible quantum particles, then they would have a better explanation and argument with big bang. We need to have the theory fit the evidence instead of the evidence made to fit the theory. Science should not just be based on empiricism, but also on a priori reasoning in addition to the scientific a posteriori reasoning. This is all part of epistemology. We need to use facts, reasoning, and historical truths in science since not everything can be proven by scientific method.

I've read Dr. John Morris' explanation for a creator -- Should the Public Schools Teach Creation? -- and today we have a more updated version from Lee Strobel -- Strong case, but flawed by compromise (Review of Lee Strobel, Case for Creator) - creation.com. creation.com gives a brief overview without reading his book. Sorry, I haven't read his book, but have watched the video below.

No, we should not be teaching creationism as science. It is just a 'God of the gaps' fallacy.

hey you ever find that proof of a common designer or what it looked like and how it spawned all other life???

 

[anynameyouwish]

I mean fact should only be taught in school. Fact isnt indoctrination

Evolution of humans isn't "fact"...toss it

Our species is Homo sapiens sapiens. One of the long extinct species on our planet that had once interbred with our species, whom some white Europeans have DNA in their genome, is Homo sapiens neanderthalensis.

So, when you say, "pesky missing link is so elusive," I'm not really sure you know a whole lot about physical anthropology.

Neanderthals: Facts About Our Extinct Human Relatives | Live Science

Europeans are closer to Neanderthals than first thought | Daily Mail Online

The fact is that no matter how hard they try "scientists" can't connect the missing links in human evolution. That's just factual

the fact is that no matter how hard they try evangelicals can't provide any evidence of a god. That is just a fact.

and they openly admit that and call it faith not fact

actually.....

you lie.


they may ultimately ADMIT IT and call it FAITH but they are constantly using ridiculous things to "prove that god exists"

"Proof that god is real" is a common thread.....

although they can't actually provide any proof.

 

[progressive hunter]

Evolution of humans isn't "fact"...toss it

Our species is Homo sapiens sapiens. One of the long extinct species on our planet that had once interbred with our species, whom some white Europeans have DNA in their genome, is Homo sapiens neanderthalensis.

So, when you say, "pesky missing link is so elusive," I'm not really sure you know a whole lot about physical anthropology.

Neanderthals: Facts About Our Extinct Human Relatives | Live Science

Europeans are closer to Neanderthals than first thought | Daily Mail Online

The fact is that no matter how hard they try "scientists" can't connect the missing links in human evolution. That's just factual

the fact is that no matter how hard they try evangelicals can't provide any evidence of a god. That is just a fact.

and they openly admit that and call it faith not fact

actually.....

you lie.


they may ultimately ADMIT IT and call it FAITH but they are constantly using ridiculous things to "prove that god exists"

"Proof that god is real" is a common thread.....

although they can't actually provide any proof.

got a link??

 

[james bond]

Creation should be taught as a fantasy

Why is it fantasy when it is the truth and backed by science and the scientific method? You didn't read my links nor watch the video either.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Faith shouldn't be taught in schools. Period.

That's what we're doing now. We are teaching faith-based science. You have nothing to back up macroevolution via the scientific method.

Evolution is not fully discovered. It is a theory, a work in progress with a level of undeniable certainty.

I've seen no undeniable certainty in evolution,,

Evolution is small changes over a long time. Human beings are about 5% taller today than they were 100 years ago. That is a microcosm of evolution and it is undeniable.

And I’ve seen no evidence of a god that I should revere and pray to.

 

[progressive hunter]

Faith shouldn't be taught in schools. Period.

That's what we're doing now. We are teaching faith-based science. You have nothing to back up macroevolution via the scientific method.

Evolution is not fully discovered. It is a theory, a work in progress with a level of undeniable certainty.

I've seen no undeniable certainty in evolution,,

Evolution is small changes over a long time. Human beings are about 5% taller today than they were 100 years ago. That is a microcosm of evolution and it is undeniable.

And I’ve seen no evidence of a god that I should revere and pray to.

or it could be all the chemicals we are putting in the food,,,

sorry but that is not proof we all came from a rock

 

[danielpalos]

Creation science is backed by the scientific method, so it should be taught in schools. Part of the problem is science today only accepts what is natural in the physical world. It is based on the philosophy of empiricism, but today's science does not follow it nor is it backed by the scientific method. What today's science of evolution is backed by is consensus and circumstantial forensic evidence. Why only evolution is taught in schools is because today's science does not allow for a supernatural creator to be involved in the "creation" of the universe, Earth, and everything in it. This is not science when evidence can be provided for the supernatural in creation through the Bible. It is part of Genesis and how God created the natural world. The assumption that there was no supernatural occurrence during the beginning is unscientific. One of the most basic arguments for a creator is the universe began to exist, not an eternal universe, and we have Kalam's Cosmological argument.

Furthermore, we are here -- the universe and everything in it exists! Now, if evolution and its big bang could explain in detail of how the electromagnetic spectrum, the Higgs field, the cosmic microwave background, and how amino acids formed into proteins in outer space from nothing or invisible quantum particles, then they would have a better explanation and argument with big bang. We need to have the theory fit the evidence instead of the evidence made to fit the theory. Science should not just be based on empiricism, but also on a priori reasoning in addition to the scientific a posteriori reasoning. This is all part of epistemology. We need to use facts, reasoning, and historical truths in science since not everything can be proven by scientific method.

I've read Dr. John Morris' explanation for a creator -- Should the Public Schools Teach Creation? -- and today we have a more updated version from Lee Strobel -- Strong case, but flawed by compromise (Review of Lee Strobel, Case for Creator) - creation.com. creation.com gives a brief overview without reading his book. Sorry, I haven't read his book, but have watched the video below.

All myths are based on Creationism.

 

[cnm]

"Creation science is backed by the scientific method". Not even close. Have a link?

Come on. He's got a video!

 

[alang1216]

hey you ever find that proof of a common designer or what it looked like and how it spawned all other life???

Yes I did. Thanks for asking.

 

[progressive hunter]

hey you ever find that proof of a common designer or what it looked like and how it spawned all other life???

Yes I did. Thanks for asking.

no you didnt,,,still asking,,,

 

[cnm]

Anyone bother to watch it?

 

[james bond]

I've read some of the arguments for Creationism, and they get pretty deep in the weeds about dating techniques, DNA testing, etc. as well as the philosophical arguments for God. K-12 doesn't get into that kind of detail. It is mostly a refutation of the techniques used to date and analyze artifacts. I'm not sure how well a K-12 student would grasp a lot of that. Just telling them that God created the world because science is all wet isn't much of a curriculum.

I know what you are referring to because that's where I get information, too, to compare to Understanding Evolution. All my evolution and creation came during post-grad studies and as an adult primarily. During 2007 - 2011 time frame a lot of secular articles came out against evolution. I didn't become Christian until 2012. Thus, I'm not sure what can help teach K - 12 curriculums. I would think the K - 12 would need to learn both. That's the topic of my post. On the creation side, we have the Bible and ID.

Have you checked out these websites? I haven't,. Just know who supports these sites. The AIG site has baraminology for kids.

AIG
Creation & Apologetics Videos for Kids

Creation homeschool mom
Creation Science 4 Kids

ID
Intelligent Design

Discovery Institute

 

[james bond]

Evolution is not fully discovered. It is a theory, a work in progress with a level of undeniable certainty.

Where's your undeniable certainty? I said it was evidence made to fit a theory.

 

[james bond]

The natural selection evolution experiments of Gregor Mendel can be reproduced in advanced High School or beginning college biology courses with either plants, or more commonly, with fruit flies. . .

Natural selection, artificial selection, hybrid breeding such as horse + donkey = mule, and epigenetics are part of creation science, too. It's variations within a species. It's the other principles of evolution that are questioned.

 

[james bond]

I mean fact should only be taught in school. Fact isnt indoctrination

No, teach a person how to think. Let them find what the facts are and make their own conclusions. Kids and students are indoctrinated in biased science. Let them learn the other creation science.

 

[james bond]

"Creation science is backed by the scientific method". Not even close. Have a link?

For you, I have to provide stuff like this so you'll read, learn, and, heaven forbid, think.