It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Wisconsin district to teach more than evolution

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 13 2005 @ 11:30 PM
link   
You have not encountered any mathematical or archelogoical flaws in the theory of evolution. If you believe that evolution is merely a theory and creationism is even remotely possible then you are dumb as nails and can't do math anyway. Teach the kids something coherent so they can compete in this global economy. I mean are you serious? Creationism? That is completely ridiculous.

[edit on 13-2-2005 by h4n1144]

[edit on 13-2-2005 by h4n1144]

[edit on 13-2-2005 by h4n1144]




posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by h4n1144
You have not encountered any mathematical or archelogoical flaws in the theory of evolution. If you believe that evolution is merely a theory and creationism is even remotely possible then you are dumb as nails and can't do math anyway.


Would you mind pointing out some mathematical or achaeological flaws in the theory that unicorns existed? There isn't any proof that they do exist, but since you can't find any flaws in the theory we should teach it in school, is that your point? Let's just be fair about this you know.

It's one thing to say that creationism does not merit teaching in school. It is another thing entirely to call creationists names and say they are stupid just because they can't prove your theory wrong.

I can't help noting that you have not named any mathematical or archaeological flaws in christianity? Are you just assuming they exist, or are you just taking somebody's word for it? I'll be honest- I have no clue whether or not Christianity has been debunked, but I wouldn't go claiming that it is unless I had a convincing arguement to share.


Teach the kids something coherent so they can compete in this global economy. I mean are you serious? Creationism? That is completely ridiculous.


Evolution won't do that either. Maybe you are suggesting that school should emphasize foreign language skills and maths over biology? I don't feel that I'm qualified to get into that discussion, and it is off topic anyway.

[edit on 14-2-2005 by The Vagabond]



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 04:21 PM
link   
Only theories backed by the scientific method should be taught in science class.
If you start teaching creationism then any mythology can be entered into the class. That what is mythology, it can not be backed by the scientific method, the core of everything taught in science.

Example of Mythology that could be taught by not having the scientific method. Wichcraft, Hindu,and so on.



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Snowman9
Only theories backed by the scientific method should be taught in science class.


By that criteria creation should be taught in science class. Creationists and evolutionists deal with the same physical evidenceand use the same methods. It is the axioms that influence the interpretation of the evidence that differ.


Steve



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 05:05 PM
link   
The scientific method is the process by which scientists, collectively and over time, endeavor to construct an accurate (that is, reliable, consistent and non-arbitrary) representation of the world.

A group of scientist come together to share these views based on the avaible facts. Evolution, and fossils and so on.

Religon is not looked upon in the scientific method.

If you start to let creation in the class, you must start to let mythology too. That goes with everything that come with it.


For the record I belive in Creation.



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 06:38 PM
link   
If I understand what you are saying, you might be confusing historical science and operational science. The scientific method can only be applied to things that are observable and repeatable. In order to connect the evidence we have in the present to events that occurred in the past we must begin with a set of beliefs known as axioms to make sense of the evidence. Evolution, as defined as one kind of life changing over time into other kinds of life, is based on the belief that there is no God or that God did not perform any special acts of creation. Creation science is based on the belief that God did perform special acts of creation and that he created each kind of life and that each kind reproduces after their own kind. This just happens to be what we observe today (Go figure!). So you see evolution is not a fact but is based on beliefs about what occurred in the past and should be presented as such in school.


Steve



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 09:18 PM
link   
Point well taken and I agree with you.

I though still dont think about creation being taught in school. Unless nothing is really said about it. Religon always causes discussion, which I would not want a teacher to do ,to my kids.

Also I no that the religous right is the big pusher behind this and wants the Bible to be disscussed, but some people in school might have different
beliefs and views. This is great for philisopy, but science, I dont know about. Puts a lot of trust in our school system, where I think it should be taught at home.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join