Creationism Vs. Evolution

[Farnhamia]

Personally I'm very tired of this debate. However, here is my opinion anyway:

Even though I think Evolution is far more reasonable to be taught, neither should be in public education. It pisses too many people off at this point so it should be left alone. I think private schools should teach whatever the bloody hell they want though, without state intervention.

Yeah, let's just kick out one of the main principles of the biological sciences because someone might get upset. Sorry, no.

[Farnhamia]

Genesis 2:7 says, "Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being." Sounds like "how" to me.

Genesis 2:7 says, "Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being."

God formed a man

a man

Like with Eve, you people seem to be confusing one human for an entire race of people.

According to some people, that's where everyone came from.

[Grandtaria]

Personally I'm very tired of this debate. However, here is my opinion anyway:

Even though I think Evolution is far more reasonable to be taught, neither should be in public education. It pisses too many people off at this point so it should be left alone. I think private schools should teach whatever the bloody hell they want though, without state intervention.

Yeah, let's just kick out one of the main principles of the biological sciences because someone might get upset. Sorry, no.

I honestly think one can study basic biology with only a minor understanding of the principles of Evolution. By the time it is reached by the upper curriculum and higher education it will be a private matter.

[Dimmerster]

I agree that creationism should not be taught in school, but evolution should

Why not evolution, creationism and say... five other actually existing ideas and one which is wholly made up by the teacher ?
Getting rid of the whole idea that these two are the only two possibilities is a good start to promote critical thinking. Because then kids would have to start pondering how to value each of the explanations, which is a great way to introduce and explain things like the scientific method.

But as I said, first thing one needs to do is to stop pretending there is a dichotomy. Stop pretending it is either A or B, but tell kids there are many, many full alphabets out there - and that some are more useful than others.

According to this view then surely every single question must have many possible answers even if one has been proved. There is a dichotomy as evolution has been proved, we should teach scientific fact.

[The Chaos Heart]

Like with Eve, you people seem to be confusing one human for an entire race of people.

According to some people, that's where everyone came from.

If they read the Bible, they would find that Adam waas not in fact the first man, as, as noted above, in an earlier verse in Genisis it talks about how God made humans. Adam was simply special in that God made him from dust.

Also, speaking of coming from dust, please refer yourself to my tree and clay examples.

[Farnhamia]

Yeah, let's just kick out one of the main principles of the biological sciences because someone might get upset. Sorry, no.

I honestly think one can study basic biology with only a minor understanding of the principles of Evolution. By the time it is reached by the upper curriculum and higher education it will be a private matter.

But some people might be upset that it is taught at public high schools or universities? What then? What about scientists who receive public grants, some people might not like them using tax dollars to study evolution. Perhaps we should ban the use of public money for that, hmm?

[The Chaos Heart]

If I dissapear soon, it's because I'm exhausted and need sleep. If I don't get back to any posts right away, I'll try and do so tomorrow, granted this topic is still active.

[Farnhamia]

If I dissapear soon, it's because I'm exhausted and need sleep. If I don't get back to any posts right away, I'll try and do so tomorrow, granted this topic is still active.

That's okay. The topic is pointless, isn't it?

[Grandtaria]

I honestly think one can study basic biology with only a minor understanding of the principles of Evolution. By the time it is reached by the upper curriculum and higher education it will be a private matter.

But some people might be upset that it is taught at public high schools or universities? What then? What about scientists who receive public grants, some people might not like them using tax dollars to study evolution. Perhaps we should ban the use of public money for that, hmm?

Universities are a private institution and trying to free them of bias was a lost cause in the very instant of their creation, as for high schools, they again, from my experience, breeze over biology without delving into advanced study into the field. If I am incorrect, then I suggest pushing it into university.

Scientists who study evolution through public grants are studying the field with public grants have my support. They are discovering new facts in a scientific field, rather then distributing those facts. People who stand against that are in the direct path of scientific advancement, rather then the education of their children and as such should have no say in how money is dived out to them.

[Farnhamia]

But some people might be upset that it is taught at public high schools or universities? What then? What about scientists who receive public grants, some people might not like them using tax dollars to study evolution. Perhaps we should ban the use of public money for that, hmm?

Universities are a private institution and trying to free them of bias was a lost cause in the very instant of their creation, as for high schools, they again, from my experience, breeze over biology without delving into advanced study into the field. If I am incorrect, then I suggest pushing it into university.

Scientists who study evolution through public grants are studying the field with public grants have my support. They are discovering new facts in a scientific field, rather then distributing those facts. People who stand against that are in the direct path of scientific advancement, rather then the education of their children and as such should have no say in how money is dived out to them.

Not all universities are private. State colleges and universities receive tax dollars. And some high schools have courses that are better than just breezing over the subject. So no mention of evolution in public schools, because someone might get upset because it goes against what they were told in Sunday School?

[Proletarian Michigan]

a belief is you think something might be there.
a hypothesis is a way to find out if the belief is true
many theories are created from the facts and evidence that is gathered
as more and more fact come together and more people look at them and talk about them, the theories swindle down and eventually lead to one.
This one is fact.

Science is getting close, i say you religious people get cracking and find an answer soon , you guys are behind quite a bit if you want all of us to believe what come out of your mouth cuz what are you going to do when science proves that you are wrong, and you did not even try to find out first??? you guys stop killing each other and look at your own "facts" from those books...... i am trying to be neutral...

I will only believe what has been found to be true over and over again. No matter who redoes the experiment

[The Chaos Heart]

If I dissapear soon, it's because I'm exhausted and need sleep. If I don't get back to any posts right away, I'll try and do so tomorrow, granted this topic is still active.

That's okay. The topic is pointless, isn't it?

Yes, it is, but it does amuse me to rain on everyone's parade and point out the fact that they are arguing nothing. It doesn't matter if you think Evolution is true or not and it doesn't meatter if you think Creationism is true or not. They aren't related. Pointing out poeple's logical falacies, for whatever reasons, brings me a bit of joy. Perhaps it's because I'm revealing the true nature of something. Perhaps it's because I'm in some way fighitng for justice in my sub concious mind. Perhaps it's because deep down I'm an arrogant prick who wants to feel superior.

Whatever the reason, I enjoy debating and the clash of ideals, and the (usually) inevitable defeat of one's particular thought process. It's intriguing to me.


Suffice to say, yes, the topic is pointless, but it still amuses me, and I don't like to not respond to posts directed at me.

[Farnhamia]

That's okay. The topic is pointless, isn't it?

Yes, it is, but it does amuse me to rain on everyone's parade and point out the fact that they are arguing nothing. It doesn't matter if you think Evolution is true or not and it doesn't meatter if you think Creationism is true or not. They aren't related. Pointing out poeple's logical falacies, for whatever reasons, brings me a bit of joy. Perhaps it's because I'm revealing the true nature of something. Perhaps it's because I'm in some way fighitng for justice in my sub concious mind. Perhaps it's because deep down I'm an arrogant prick who wants to feel superior.

Whatever the reason, I enjoy debating and the clash of ideals, and the (usually) inevitable defeat of one's particular thought process. It's intriguing to me.


Suffice to say, yes, the topic is pointless, but it still amuses me, and I don't like to not respond to posts directed at me.

A self-admitted troll. Good to know. Sleep well.

[The Chaos Heart]

Yes, it is, but it does amuse me to rain on everyone's parade and point out the fact that they are arguing nothing. It doesn't matter if you think Evolution is true or not and it doesn't meatter if you think Creationism is true or not. They aren't related. Pointing out poeple's logical falacies, for whatever reasons, brings me a bit of joy. Perhaps it's because I'm revealing the true nature of something. Perhaps it's because I'm in some way fighitng for justice in my sub concious mind. Perhaps it's because deep down I'm an arrogant prick who wants to feel superior.

Whatever the reason, I enjoy debating and the clash of ideals, and the (usually) inevitable defeat of one's particular thought process. It's intriguing to me.


Suffice to say, yes, the topic is pointless, but it still amuses me, and I don't like to not respond to posts directed at me.

A self-admitted troll. Good to know. Sleep well.

How, pray tell, am I being a troll? Does that make all poeple who enjoy debate and take a clas in debate a troll? Would I have wasted so much time putting thought into my posts if I was a troll? You seem to be quick to launch personal attacks at someone for simply thinking differently. Whether someone is right or wrong, there is no reason to be so rude as to try to devalue their arguement by insulting them.

[Grandtaria]

Universities are a private institution and trying to free them of bias was a lost cause in the very instant of their creation, as for high schools, they again, from my experience, breeze over biology without delving into advanced study into the field. If I am incorrect, then I suggest pushing it into university.

Scientists who study evolution through public grants are studying the field with public grants have my support. They are discovering new facts in a scientific field, rather then distributing those facts. People who stand against that are in the direct path of scientific advancement, rather then the education of their children and as such should have no say in how money is dived out to them.

Not all universities are private. State colleges and universities receive tax dollars. And some high schools have courses that are better than just breezing over the subject. So no mention of evolution in public schools, because someone might get upset because it goes against what they were told in Sunday School?

You seem fixed on painting me a creationist. I'm not. I want to be clear on that.

While you do have a point, if I may point a few things out.
To avoid this problem, I am a supporter of a privatized education system, who's curriculum is determined by voting every few years.

I wish to point out that "Someone might get upset" is a complete understatement. The teaching of evolution or creationism in schools, or to a lesser amount, both, would have the the supporters of either side completely up in arms, as it is a very polarizing topic. This leads to the state being called biased and people eventually developing political apathy from insane amounts of media coverage.

I think anything is better then teaching one or the other publicly, completely in spite of how valid either are (Let me again state, I stand in favor of evolution.) simply because it distracts us from real issues, and I'm just tired of hearing it.

[Lilistrea]

Since when do important and established theories stop being taught because some people are upset with it?

I'm so glad this shit isn't an issue in my country, people get laughed at for demanding to take evolution out of secondary school biology.

[DaWoad]

Not all universities are private. State colleges and universities receive tax dollars. And some high schools have courses that are better than just breezing over the subject. So no mention of evolution in public schools, because someone might get upset because it goes against what they were told in Sunday School?

You seem fixed on painting me a creationist. I'm not. I want to be clear on that.

While you do have a point, if I may point a few things out.
To avoid this problem, I am a supporter of a privatized education system, who's curriculum is determined by voting every few years.

I wish to point out that "Someone might get upset" is a complete understatement. The teaching of evolution or creationism in schools, or to a lesser amount, both, would have the the supporters of either side completely up in arms, as it is a very polarizing topic. This leads to the state being called biased and people eventually developing political apathy from insane amounts of media coverage.

I think anything is better then teaching one or the other publicly, completely in spite of how valid either are (Let me again state, I stand in favor of evolution.) simply because it distracts us from real issues, and I'm just tired of hearing it.

except that, again, evolution is an essential part of biology beyond the "this is how cells reproduce asexually" stage. This is a real issue. In fact, it may be The real issue as it's either a place for secularism to point out exactly how important it is or one where theocracy makes it's first inroad into an important subject.

[The Alma Mater]

Why not evolution, creationism and say... five other actually existing ideas and one which is wholly made up by the teacher ?
Getting rid of the whole idea that these two are the only two possibilities is a good start to promote critical thinking. Because then kids would have to start pondering how to value each of the explanations, which is a great way to introduce and explain things like the scientific method.

But as I said, first thing one needs to do is to stop pretending there is a dichotomy. Stop pretending it is either A or B, but tell kids there are many, many full alphabets out there - and that some are more useful than others.

According to this view then surely every single question must have many possible answers even if one has been proved. There is a dichotomy as evolution has been proved, we should teach scientific fact.

Nitpick: Science does not prove things. Saying the theory of evolution through natural selection has been proven is just as wrong as saying it is "only" a theory, while thinking a theory is merely something ones pulls out of ones arse. Science has a whole vocabulary - which evidently deserves more attention in the classroom

Back to your response: you almost understand. The fact is indeed that the theory of evolution is VASTLY superior to ALL the millions of competitors out there, and has proven its worth in many industries.

The problem however is that, thanks to clever propaganda, many people in the USA believe that

a. This is merely an academical debate, with the truth having no impact in real life. They think that it is merely a matter of diferent opinions, not something with far reaching consequences - quite a few of them directly lifethreatening.

b. There are only two options, and one is not getting serious attention because scientists are too arrogant.

Those incorrect views must be corrected before we can work on acceptance.

[Imperia-Bankous]

Evolution - people should let go of their stupid book when it has been proven wrong. They can cling onto the other nonsense until science proves those wrong too.

They should stop teaching children religion altogether, and if they want to celebrate a jewish zombie when they are older they can decide to, but without it they instead think rationally and logically.

[Unchecked Expansion]

Nitpick: Science does not prove things. Saying the theory of evolution through natural selection has been proven is just as wrong as saying it is "only" a theory, while thinking a theory is merely something ones pulls out of ones arse. Science has a whole vocabulary - which evidently deserves more attention in the classroom

Evolution has been proven - in the same way as gravity, or heavier than air flight, or splitting the atom. But theories are not proven, because that isn't what they're about.

[Bottle]

Nitpick: Science does not prove things. Saying the theory of evolution through natural selection has been proven is just as wrong as saying it is "only" a theory, while thinking a theory is merely something ones pulls out of ones arse. Science has a whole vocabulary - which evidently deserves more attention in the classroom

Evolution has been proven - in the same way as gravity, or heavier than air flight, or splitting the atom. But theories are not proven, because that isn't what they're about.

To clarify, "evolution" hasn't been proven, because evolution isn't a theory...evolution is a FACT. It is an observed phenomenon. You don't "prove" that the Pacific Ocean contains water, because you can simply observe the fact that there's a bit of water in there.

The theory is about HOW evolution occurs. We have more support for the theory of evolution via natural selection than we have for any other single theory in the history of modern science. So, while it is impossible to ever prove a hypothesis or theory (by definition), we're doing the next best thing,

But nobody needs to "prove" evolution. Because evolution is simply a fact.

[Neo Art]

Evolution has been proven - in the same way as gravity, or heavier than air flight, or splitting the atom. But theories are not proven, because that isn't what they're about.

To clarify, "evolution" hasn't been proven, because evolution isn't a theory...evolution is a FACT. It is an observed phenomenon. You don't "prove" that the Pacific Ocean contains water, because you can simply observe the fact that there's a bit of water in there.

The theory is about HOW evolution occurs. We have more support for the theory of evolution via natural selection than we have for any other single theory in the history of modern science. So, while it is impossible to ever prove a hypothesis or theory (by definition), we're doing the next best thing,

But nobody needs to "prove" evolution. Because evolution is simply a fact.

The problem is, I think, is that people don't understand what science is and how it works. People say things like "evolution is a theory!" and "gravity is a theory!"

Neither are theories, because that's putting the cart before the horse. Words like "evolution" and "gravity" are just words we use to label phenomena we've already observed. We KNOW masses attract each other. We know this as a FACT. We call that fact "gravity".

WHY masses attract one another, we haven't a fucking clue. Maybe it's quatum, maybe it's relativistic. The THEORY of quantum gravity, the THEORY of special realativity. Those aren't theories OF gravity, because gravity is a fact, it's just a term we use to describe what we've already observed.

They're theories to explain WHY the fact that we've observed happens. And to an extent, that's what science is, it starts with observable FACTS, and tryes to theorize as to why.

Evolution occurs, we've SEEN it occur.

WHY it occurs is the theory. And it's a theory that's as pretty close to known "fact" in and of itself as you can get.

[Bottle]

To clarify, "evolution" hasn't been proven, because evolution isn't a theory...evolution is a FACT. It is an observed phenomenon. You don't "prove" that the Pacific Ocean contains water, because you can simply observe the fact that there's a bit of water in there.

The theory is about HOW evolution occurs. We have more support for the theory of evolution via natural selection than we have for any other single theory in the history of modern science. So, while it is impossible to ever prove a hypothesis or theory (by definition), we're doing the next best thing,

But nobody needs to "prove" evolution. Because evolution is simply a fact.

The problem is, I think, is that people don't understand what science is and how it works. People say things like "evolution is a theory!" and "gravity is a theory!"

Neither are theories, because that's putting the cart before the horse. Words like "evolution" and "gravity" are just words we use to label phenomena we've already observed. We KNOW masses attract each other. We know this as a FACT. We call that fact "gravity".

WHY masses attract one another, we haven't a fucking clue. Maybe it's quatum, maybe it's relativistic. The THEORY of quantum gravity, the THEORY of special realativity. Those aren't theories OF gravity, because gravity is a fact, it's just a term we use to describe what we've already observed.

They're theories to explain WHY the fact that we've observed happens. And to an extent, that's what science is, it starts with observable FACTS, and tryes to theorize as to why.

Evolution occurs, we've SEEN it occur.

WHY it occurs is the theory. And it's a theory that's as pretty close to known "fact" in and of itself as you can get.

Absolutely. And this is the point that I find myself hammering OVER AND OVER AND FUCKING OVER on these threads. It's absolutely disgusting how many people are old enough to post on the internet yet have not received this absolutely fucking basic scientific education. It makes me ashamed of my country to know that the overwhelming majority of them are Americans.

[Ifreann]

[color=#BF0000][i]This debate amuses me, if only because most people here don't seem to understand how wrong they are. Creationism is a theory as to how the worlds and creatures that inhabit Earth came to be.

most people here don't seem to understand how wrong they are. Creationism is a theory

don't seem to understand how wrong they are. Creationism is a theory

[Tekania]

I am myself a creationist. I support teaching evolution in schools as a theory

Well, luckily for you we do in fact teach it as a scientific theory. Mind you the theory is the processes and mechanics by which evolution occurs, that life evolves is a fact, how it evolves is the theory.