Creationism SHOULD be taught in school. ( alongside science theories! )

I've seen a lot of threads, and plenty of articles and opinions elsewhere saying that creationism should not be taught in school, and frankly, I must disagree. School is supposed to teach the kids to think for themselves, not to follow the agenda of one political party. Evolution, and creationism should be taught in the same classroom as these are both the most widely accepted theories on how the world came about. If a third opinion came about, and was accepted and believed by a large amount of people, I would encourage that being taught, too.

You see, it's not about religion. I wouldn't tell the teacher to teach about prayer, morality, they aren't going to tell these kids how to conduct their lives under the banner of a specific sect, that's not what i am talking about - I am talking about teaching the most commonly accepted theories on how this world came about, even if conservatives dislike science and evolution, and even if liberals dislike creationism.

If anyone here on ats is several billion years old and can prove they are so old, we can have a law, or fact, or assurity on how the world came about, and we can be sure that schools only teach that. In the meantime, while we are working with theories, while we don't have a DVD that recorded earth billions of years ago, we should be teaching kids in an open minded way, we shouldn't be so quick to pigeonhole their thinking to accept only one answer - an answer that is just as much a theory itself as anything else.

I believe this should apply to all classrooms - teach the kids real history, tell them how other countries, and we interpret that history, then let them decide for themselves how to learn from the past. When I grew up I was simply reading a comic book featuring the great hero, USA.

While I realize I'll get some flack from the other side - please keep it civilized, and attempt to explain why the most common theory - THEORY - about how the world was made, should not be taught to children.

For the record - I'm talking about how the world came about, not about mutations of species and evolution over time - I realize some aspects are indeed facts, and believe schools should teach them as such.

Cheers ats, have a great weekend.

-deadlyhope

originally posted by: deadlyhope

While I realize I'll get some flack from the other side - please keep it civilized, and attempt to explain why the most common theory - THEORY - about how the world was made, should not be taught to children.

Because teaching kids "Magic" as opposed to "Science" is like going back to the Dark Ages.

Meh, Philosophy is so last millenia.

;o)

a reply to: Kryties

Well there goes the civilized request, right out the window from the get go.

If you knew more about this topic, you'd realize it's not magic, and that current studies of quantum physics and the like yield results far more insane than the existence of a higher being.

a reply to: deadlyhope

Creationism isn't a widely accepted scientific theory. Sorry you are wrong. Creationism as far as science is concerned is a hypothesis, and a rather flimsy one at that. Science isn't religion and religion doesn't belong in a science class. If you want to teach your kids to deny science, then do it, but creationism is NOT a valid alternative to evolution as far as science is concerned. So it shouldn't be in a science class.

Oh yeah, one more thing. Which Creationism are you talking about exactly? There is a creationist account for every religion in the world. Heck some religions (like Christianity) have multiple interpretations of that Creationist account too. How exactly would a class even address all of those accounts?

It is not a terrible idea to teach all roads of thought on the subject.

I think that time dilation aspects of the cosmos is the factor that separates the two theoretical paths.

Even with creationism one still needs time to bring everything together and manipulating time would do the trick.

a reply to: deadlyhope

You're right it's not magic. It's fairy tales, myths, legends, and false hoods.

The more theoretical physicists theorize about the start of the universe, the more they are swayed toward creationism or virtual reality...Peace

a reply to: deadlyhope

If creationism should be taught in our schools then so should mysticism.

a reply to: deadlyhope

Creationism is link to religion sadly to young earth believers, because we can not have church and state together is never going to happen.

Young Earth creationism (YEC) is the religious belief[1] that the Universe, Earth and all life on Earth were created by direct acts of God during a relatively short period, between 5,700 and 10,000 years ago.[2] Its primary adherents are those Christians and Jews[3] who, using a literal interpretation of the Genesis creation narrative as a basis, believe that God created the Earth in six 24-hour days.[4][5] Young Earth creationists differ from other creationists in that they believe in a strict literal interpretation of the Bible regarding the age of the Earth. In contrast, old Earth creationists interpret the six creation days of the Book of Genesis metaphorically and accept the scientifically-determined ages of the Earth and of the universe.[6]

Since the mid-20th century, young Earth creationists - starting with Henry M. Morris (1918-2006) - have devised and promoted a pseudoscientific explanation called "creation science" as a basis for a religious belief in a supernatural, geologically recent creation.[7] Scientific evidence from numerous scientific disciplines contradicts Young Earth creationism, showing the age of the universe as 13.799±0.021 billion years, the formation of the Earth as at least 4.5 billion years ago, and the first appearance of life on Earth as occurring at least 2.5 billion years ago.[8][9][10][11]

Between 1982 and 2014, successive surveys have found that between 40% and 47% of adults in the United States inclined to the view that "God created humans in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years" when Gallup asked for their views on the origin and development of human beings.[12] A 2011 Gallup survey reports that 30% of U.S. adults say they interpret the Bible literally.[13] These beliefs are often contradictory. A 2009 poll by Harris Interactive found that 39% of Americans agreed with the statement that "God created the universe, the earth, the sun, moon, stars, plants, animals, and the first two people within the past 10 000 years", yet only 18% of the Americans polled agreed with the statement "The earth is less than 10 000 years old".[14]

That summarizes why creationism doesn't belong in schools curriculum

en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: deadlyhope
a reply to: Kryties

Well there goes the civilized request, right out the window from the get go.

If you knew more about this topic, you'd realize it's not magic, and that current studies of quantum physics and the like yield results far more insane than the existence of a higher being.

What part of that post wasn't civilized? Please stop playing victim.

I happen to know quite a fair bit about the subject too, thankyou very much - despite your attempts to paint me otherwise.

This articulates my point of view far better than I can:

a reply to: Krazysh0t

A theory is a theory, and all theories in science form a belief system that a person CHOOSES to believe - sure, based on specific evidences, but with how old the world is believed to be, we have no clue how it actually came about, and shouldn't teach only one theory because people somehow think their belief in their "magic" is more important than others.

Creationism in general. I already specified that religion should not be included. The idea that the world was organized by something intelligent. Don't even use the word God.

a reply to: cuckooold

I never mentioned the Bible. I think the Bible should be left out of Schools.

a reply to: marg6043

That's a specific flavor of creationism, I'm not talking about any religion, or any brand of it. Simply to teach that it's just as valid as any other theory on how the universe was made, at any point in time - can anyone in this thread show me something that's not a theory about how to universe came about? It would be news to me.

a reply to: deadlyhope

So explain the theory of creationism. Just so we know.

a reply to: deadlyhope

plato.stanford.edu...

At a broad level, a Creationist is someone who believes in a god who is absolute creator of heaven and earth, out of nothing, by an act of free will. Such a deity is generally thought to be constantly involved (‘immanent’) in the creation, ready to intervene as necessary, and without whose constant concern the creation would cease or disappear. Christians, Jews, and Muslims are all Creationists in this sense.

originally posted by: deadlyhope
a reply to: Krazysh0t

A theory is a theory, and all theories in science form a belief system that a person CHOOSES to believe - sure, based on specific evidences, but with how old the world is believed to be, we have no clue how it actually came about, and shouldn't teach only one theory because people somehow think their belief in their "magic" is more important than others.

A theory has a SPECIFIC definition in science. Creationism DOESN'T match up to this definition in the slightest. It matches up to the scientific definition of a hypothesis more so, but even then it is still lacking in attributes. Yes, a theory is a theory, but you can't just label a belief as a "theory" and be correct just because it is widely believed in the world.

Creationism in general. I already specified that religion should not be included. The idea that the world was organized by something intelligent. Don't even use the word God.

What if it was created by multiple gods? What if it was created by a complex and unthinking algorithm? You can't just unify all the religions into one umbrella Creationism account. You'd have a haphazard mess of conflicting beliefs and ideas. Again science is PRECISE. Even the definition of words is precise. There is no room for vagueness, only margin of error.

If you want to define Creationism in science then you need to give a specific definition of what it is and the OBJECTIVE evidence that led you to that conclusion. Oh yeah, you can't start with the conclusion predetermined and look for evidence to suit your narrative. You need to collect the evidence FIRST, then interpret it. All creationist accounts are guilty of not doing that.

Things like religion or religious notions do not belong in school unless it is sunday school, and only if the kid wants to go to sunday school.

Religious freedom and freedom from religion are the same thing and should be the choice of the individual.

a reply to: Woodcarver

An intelligent, or higher being had a hand in the creation of this universe, willing it to be.

I'm saying the teachers and books should have the option, I'm not saying it should be the Title of the book, nor should the teacher go into any specific beliefs of any single religion.