Creationism in Public Schools

[Neutraligon]

We were taught both in my high school. When the teacher said that "Evolution means we come from apes" I objected. I told him he was incorrect and he told me to leave.

Evolution means humans and apes evolved from a common ancestor. Proven via miller/urey. Creationism means we don't know where/when existence began so here is a myth. I consider creation myths an important part of culture but they should not be taught in a publicly funded school.

Our common ancestor was an ape though...

I've actually heard some people advocate we are monkeys for the same reason (old world monkeys and new world monkeys make this the case)

[Cekoviu]

Our common ancestor was an ape though...

I've actually heard some people advocate we are monkeys for the same reason (old world monkeys and new world monkeys make this the case)

If "monkey" is defined as being a member of Haplorhini, then we are monkeys. The term is a bit ambiguous, though.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

I went to Catholic school. All my school life, from preschool to high school graduation. Anything religious was relegated to the religion class. Our science classes limited themselves to teach science. Religion never factored in in those.

I don’t get why some want creationism, which is probably a topic best discussed at Sunday school, to be taught at a science class.

[Tekania]

The US Supreme Court has not allowed creation science to be taught in public schools since 1968, when it invalidated an Arkansas law that didn't allow evolution to be taught in schools (Epperson v. Arkansas). The Supreme Court continued to encourage evolution instead of creation science in Edwards v. Aguillard, in which it held teaching of creation science along with evolution to be unconstitutional. However, many scientists believe that there is more scientific evidence for creation.

Christian groups have attempted to bring creation science back into public schools since it was banned. South Carolina's House Bill 3826, while unsuccessful, proposed teaching creation science in schools. However, none of these attempts have been successful.

What do you think, NSG? Should public schools be allowed to teach creation science? Should they teach evolution and creation science? Or is creation science unconstitutional?

I think creation and evolution should both be taught equally so students in public schools can choose for themselves what they believe. Although it would be unconstitutional if only the Christian perspective is taught, other religions could also be taught.

Depends on the context. If you're talking about curriculum for science classes, then only evolution should be presented. If you're talking about an elective course on mythology then sure, creation myths can be taught in there.

[Neutraligon]

I've actually heard some people advocate we are monkeys for the same reason (old world monkeys and new world monkeys make this the case)

If "monkey" is defined as being a member of Haplorhini, then we are monkeys. The term is a bit ambiguous, though.

Yep, kinda like reptile or fish.

[The South Falls]

I went to Catholic school. All my school life, from preschool to high school graduation. Anything religious was relegated to the religion class. Our science classes limited themselves to teach science. Religion never factored in in those.

I don’t get why some want creationism, which is probably a topic best discussed at Sunday school, to be taught at a science class.

Yea, creationism seems like the kind of thing that's taught in ultrareligious private schools do.

[Cekoviu]

If "monkey" is defined as being a member of Haplorhini, then we are monkeys. The term is a bit ambiguous, though.

Yep, kinda like reptile or fish.

It's generally polyphyletic Platyrrhini and Cercopithecidae tho, so it's not really an issue (since that excludes apes -> humans).

[Kremlinian Russia]

Creationism has no place in any schools. The scientific consensus is against it, and as such, it can't be taught as fact.

If you scroll down, here's a list of creation scientists.

Funny how more scientists signed this.

Project Steve sounds unironically based as fuck.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

I went to Catholic school. All my school life, from preschool to high school graduation. Anything religious was relegated to the religion class. Our science classes limited themselves to teach science. Religion never factored in in those.

I don’t get why some want creationism, which is probably a topic best discussed at Sunday school, to be taught at a science class.

Yea, creationism seems like the kind of thing that's taught in ultrareligious private schools do.

It’s kind of like wanting to teach numerology in math class. I mean, ok, numbers are involved but numerology has nothing to do with a school curriculum. Unless you study it as an elective at uni.

[Tekania]

We were taught both in my high school. When the teacher said that "Evolution means we come from apes" I objected. I told him he was incorrect and he told me to leave.

Evolution means humans and apes evolved from a common ancestor. Proven via miller/urey. Creationism means we don't know where/when existence began so here is a myth. I consider creation myths an important part of culture but they should not be taught in a publicly funded school.

"Ape" itself is not a very specific term. Ape itself is a term applied to a group of tailless primates including a sub segment known as the Great Apes. By the accepted definition of what constitutes "The apes" and more specifically "The Great Apes" Homo Sapiens are a member of the Great Apes along with Chimpanzees, Bonobos, Gorillas and Orangutans. It's more accurate to say homo sapiens are apes.

You would be hard pressed to come up with some criteria for defining an ape which would not encompass homo sapiens as well.

[Cekoviu]

We were taught both in my high school. When the teacher said that "Evolution means we come from apes" I objected. I told him he was incorrect and he told me to leave.

Evolution means humans and apes evolved from a common ancestor. Proven via miller/urey. Creationism means we don't know where/when existence began so here is a myth. I consider creation myths an important part of culture but they should not be taught in a publicly funded school.

"Ape" itself is not a very specific term. Ape itself is a term applied to a group of tailless primates including a sub segment known as the Great Apes. By the accepted definition of what constitutes "The apes" and more specifically "The Great Apes" Homo Sapiens are a member of the Great Apes along with Chimpanzees, Bonobos, Gorillas and Orangutans. It's more accurate to say homo sapiens are apes.

Biologist cringe. Binomial names always need to be italicized with the first term in title case and the second all lowercase: Homo sapiens sapiens, Gromphadorhina portentosa, etc.

[The South Falls]

Yea, creationism seems like the kind of thing that's taught in ultrareligious private schools do.

It’s kind of like wanting to teach numerology in math class. I mean, ok, numbers are involved but numerology has nothing to do with a school curriculum. Unless you study it as an elective at uni.

666 is the hell number kids. So anyone who's six is getting cast out.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

It’s kind of like wanting to teach numerology in math class. I mean, ok, numbers are involved but numerology has nothing to do with a school curriculum. Unless you study it as an elective at uni.

666 is the hell number kids. So anyone who's six is getting cast out.

Or gets to study with Madonna.

[Farnhamia]

"Ape" itself is not a very specific term. Ape itself is a term applied to a group of tailless primates including a sub segment known as the Great Apes. By the accepted definition of what constitutes "The apes" and more specifically "The Great Apes" Homo Sapiens are a member of the Great Apes along with Chimpanzees, Bonobos, Gorillas and Orangutans. It's more accurate to say homo sapiens are apes.

Biologist cringe. Binomial names always need to be italicized with the first term in title case and the second all lowercase: Homo sapiens sapiens, Gromphadorhina portentosa, etc.

No, there should be half upper-case and half lower-case letters in each, unless there are an odd number of letters, in which case the name should be changed to an even number of letters, except on Wednesdays. Ultimately, yes, but does it matter in this discussion? I'm more surprised no one jumped on the Unstoppable Empire of Doom about the Miller-Urey experiment proving we evolved from apes.

[Neutraligon]

Biologist cringe. Binomial names always need to be italicized with the first term in title case and the second all lowercase: Homo sapiens sapiens, Gromphadorhina portentosa, etc.

No, there should be half upper-case and half lower-case letters in each, unless there are an odd number of letters, in which case the name should be changed to an even number of letters, except on Wednesdays. Ultimately, yes, but does it matter in this discussion? I'm more surprised no one jumped on the Unstoppable Empire of Doom about the Miller-Urey experiment proving we evolved from apes.

That's what happens when you skim posts, I missed that part.

[Farnhamia]

No, there should be half upper-case and half lower-case letters in each, unless there are an odd number of letters, in which case the name should be changed to an even number of letters, except on Wednesdays. Ultimately, yes, but does it matter in this discussion? I'm more surprised no one jumped on the Unstoppable Empire of Doom about the Miller-Urey experiment proving we evolved from apes.

That's what happens when you skim posts, I missed that part.

When you're a Mod you almost always skim posts. Otherwise we'd be doing thread trawls from 2016.

[Free Arabian Nation]

Biologist cringe. Binomial names always need to be italicized with the first term in title case and the second all lowercase: Homo sapiens sapiens, Gromphadorhina portentosa, etc.

No, there should be half upper-case and half lower-case letters in each, unless there are an odd number of letters, in which case the name should be changed to an even number of letters, except on Wednesdays. Ultimately, yes, but does it matter in this discussion? I'm more surprised no one jumped on the Unstoppable Empire of Doom about the Miller-Urey experiment proving we evolved from apes.

Yeah, what does that have to do with anything?

The Miller-Urey experiment just proved that creating the acids necessary for is possible in nature, not that humans absolutely must have evolved from apes/their ancestors

[Tekania]

Indeed. While abiogenesis experiments are nice as far has helping along the abiogenesis hypothesis (or more accurately, hypotheses as there are still competing hypotheses in that area). That itself has no relevance on the evolution of modern humans from their ancestors. Evolution is proven and established irrespective of abiogenesis. Whether life on earth was created via abiogensis, via seeding, or by some unknown creator being..... it evolved from there. miller/urey would just establish a possible set of conditions of mechanisms that could produce the initial genesis of life.

[Vetalia]

The Bible is not and will never be a scientific textbook and I find it absurd that people would attempt to abuse it in this way. It makes God to be nothing more than a liar who would create an elaborate system of creation for us to discover solely to deceive us. The fact is that organisms lived millions and even billions of years before us and evolved into more complex organisms.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

The Bible is not and will never be a scientific textbook and I find it absurd that people would attempt to abuse it in this way. It makes God to be nothing more than a liar who would create an elaborate system of creation for us to discover solely to deceive us.

I mean, if you want to take it as such, go ahead. Do so, at church or at home. Just not on a public school curriculum.

[Vetalia]

I mean, if you want to take it as such, go ahead. Do so, at church or at home. Just not on a public school curriculum.

I agree 100%

[Northwest Slobovia]

Biologist cringe. Binomial names always need to be italicized with the first term in title case and the second all lowercase: Homo sapiens sapiens, Gromphadorhina portentosa, etc.

No, there should be half upper-case and half lower-case letters in each, unless there are an odd number of letters, in which case the name should be changed to an even number of letters, except on Wednesdays. Ultimately, yes, but does it matter in this discussion? I'm more surprised no one jumped on the Unstoppable Empire of Doom about the Miller-Urey experiment proving we evolved from apes.

'cause it looked like a badly mangled edit that went with the next sentence:

Evolution means humans and apes evolved from a common ancestor. Proven via miller/urey. Creationism means we don't know where/when existence began so here is a myth.

When one is arguing between truth and falsehood, there's little reason to poke at the mistakes in statements of truth. Something about a mote in your brother's eye, or while ignoring the beam in your enemy's. Or something like that.

[The New California Republic]

The Bible is not and will never be a scientific textbook and I find it absurd that people would attempt to abuse it in this way.

Perhaps if it hadn't made definite claims about the origins of life and the history of the universe then people might not make that mistake?

It makes God to be nothing more than a liar who would create an elaborate system of creation for us to discover solely to deceive us.

Or it goes a step further and hints that God doesn't exist perhaps.

[Farnhamia]

No, there should be half upper-case and half lower-case letters in each, unless there are an odd number of letters, in which case the name should be changed to an even number of letters, except on Wednesdays. Ultimately, yes, but does it matter in this discussion? I'm more surprised no one jumped on the Unstoppable Empire of Doom about the Miller-Urey experiment proving we evolved from apes.

'cause it looked like a badly mangled edit that went with the next sentence:

Evolution means humans and apes evolved from a common ancestor. Proven via miller/urey. Creationism means we don't know where/when existence began so here is a myth.

When one is arguing between truth and falsehood, there's little reason to poke at the mistakes in statements of truth. Something about a mote in your brother's eye, or while ignoring the beam in your enemy's. Or something like that.

Matthew 7:3, "3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?"

[Northwest Slobovia]

'cause it looked like a badly mangled edit that went with the next sentence:



When one is arguing between truth and falsehood, there's little reason to poke at the mistakes in statements of truth. Something about a mote in your brother's eye, or while ignoring the beam in your enemy's. Or something like that.

Matthew 7:3, "3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?"

Yes, Farn, I know. Barring a recent policy change, humor is still allowed in NSG. I deliberately mangled it for effect.