Creationism in Public Schools

[Geneviev]

It would be about the same as what is in Christian homeschool curriculum now.

You mean:

1) No transitional fossils exist:

"Though evolutionists have been searching for transitional fossils for more than 100 years, they have found none,"

That's a lie, BTW.

2) Nessie exists and disproves evolution

Have you heard of the ‘Loch Ness Monster’ in Scotland? ‘Nessie,’ for short, has been recorded on sonar from a small submarine, described by eyewitnesses, and photographed by others. Nessie appears to be a plesiosaur.

3) People who believe in evolution are lying

"Because evolutionists do not want to believe the only alternative – that the universe was created by God – they declare evolution is a fact and believe its impossible claims without any scientific proof!"[...] We have a risen Christ, unquestionable proofs and, as if we needed it, God has thrown in a host of inarguable evidences all around us!"

4) Humans and dinosaurs lived together

“Biblical and scientific evidence seems to indicate that men and dinosaurs lived at the same time…. Fossilized tracks in the bed of the Paluxy River near Glen Rose, Texas, also give evidence that men and dinosaurs existed simultaneously. [...]That dinosaurs existed with humans is an important discovery disproving the evolutionists’ theory that dinosaurs lived 70 million years before man. God created dinosaurs on the sixth day. He created man later the same day.”

You want kids learning this? In Science?

I'd prefer for it to be taught in a different class, and Nessie is nonsense, but other than that, yes.

It would be about the same as what is in Christian homeschool curriculum now.

Which one? I can find loads, mostly behind a paywall.
Just give an overview on what would be focused on each week/lesson.

It would be better if someone who studied evolution and creation did that, which is why Christian curriculum that already exists would be best.

[Onitsha Empire]

It would be about the same as what is in Christian homeschool curriculum now.

You mean:

1) No transitional fossils exist:

"Though evolutionists have been searching for transitional fossils for more than 100 years, they have found none,"

That's a lie, BTW.

2) Nessie exists and disproves evolution

Have you heard of the ‘Loch Ness Monster’ in Scotland? ‘Nessie,’ for short, has been recorded on sonar from a small submarine, described by eyewitnesses, and photographed by others. Nessie appears to be a plesiosaur.

3) People who believe in evolution are lying

"Because evolutionists do not want to believe the only alternative – that the universe was created by God – they declare evolution is a fact and believe its impossible claims without any scientific proof!"[...] We have a risen Christ, unquestionable proofs and, as if we needed it, God has thrown in a host of inarguable evidences all around us!"

4) Humans and dinosaurs lived together

“Biblical and scientific evidence seems to indicate that men and dinosaurs lived at the same time…. Fossilized tracks in the bed of the Paluxy River near Glen Rose, Texas, also give evidence that men and dinosaurs existed simultaneously. [...]That dinosaurs existed with humans is an important discovery disproving the evolutionists’ theory that dinosaurs lived 70 million years before man. God created dinosaurs on the sixth day. He created man later the same day.”

You want kids learning this? In Science?

When most people know the truth they inevitably begin to effectively harm each other.

All societies that don't have full Machiavellianism (there are a few exceptions such as mainland China) have uniform pro-social myths that all but a few STEM & philosophy folks believe in. You can of course get rid of Christianity but then you have to put something else such as blank slatism in or people will actually get blackpilled and defect against each other en masse.

Societies depend on lies to exist. When people know enough truths there won't even be marriages or children, let alone societies.

[The Caleshan Valkyrie]

You mean:

1) No transitional fossils exist:

"Though evolutionists have been searching for transitional fossils for more than 100 years, they have found none,"

That's a lie, BTW.

2) Nessie exists and disproves evolution

Have you heard of the ‘Loch Ness Monster’ in Scotland? ‘Nessie,’ for short, has been recorded on sonar from a small submarine, described by eyewitnesses, and photographed by others. Nessie appears to be a plesiosaur.

3) People who believe in evolution are lying

"Because evolutionists do not want to believe the only alternative – that the universe was created by God – they declare evolution is a fact and believe its impossible claims without any scientific proof!"[...] We have a risen Christ, unquestionable proofs and, as if we needed it, God has thrown in a host of inarguable evidences all around us!"

4) Humans and dinosaurs lived together

“Biblical and scientific evidence seems to indicate that men and dinosaurs lived at the same time…. Fossilized tracks in the bed of the Paluxy River near Glen Rose, Texas, also give evidence that men and dinosaurs existed simultaneously. [...]That dinosaurs existed with humans is an important discovery disproving the evolutionists’ theory that dinosaurs lived 70 million years before man. God created dinosaurs on the sixth day. He created man later the same day.”

You want kids learning this? In Science?

When most people know the truth they inevitably begin to effectively harm each other.

All societies that don't have full Machiavellianism (there are a few exceptions such as mainland China) have uniform pro-social myths that all but a few STEM & philosophy folks believe in. You can of course get rid of Christianity but then you have to put something else such as blank slatism in or people will actually get blackpilled and defect against each other en masse.

Societies depend on lies to exist. When people know enough truths there won't even be marriages or children, let alone societies.

How remarkably absurd.

[The Free Joy State]

You mean:

1) No transitional fossils exist:

"Though evolutionists have been searching for transitional fossils for more than 100 years, they have found none,"

That's a lie, BTW.

2) Nessie exists and disproves evolution

Have you heard of the ‘Loch Ness Monster’ in Scotland? ‘Nessie,’ for short, has been recorded on sonar from a small submarine, described by eyewitnesses, and photographed by others. Nessie appears to be a plesiosaur.

3) People who believe in evolution are lying

"Because evolutionists do not want to believe the only alternative – that the universe was created by God – they declare evolution is a fact and believe its impossible claims without any scientific proof!"[...] We have a risen Christ, unquestionable proofs and, as if we needed it, God has thrown in a host of inarguable evidences all around us!"

4) Humans and dinosaurs lived together

“Biblical and scientific evidence seems to indicate that men and dinosaurs lived at the same time…. Fossilized tracks in the bed of the Paluxy River near Glen Rose, Texas, also give evidence that men and dinosaurs existed simultaneously. [...]That dinosaurs existed with humans is an important discovery disproving the evolutionists’ theory that dinosaurs lived 70 million years before man. God created dinosaurs on the sixth day. He created man later the same day.”

You want kids learning this? In Science?

I'd prefer for it to be taught in a different class, and Nessie is nonsense, but other than that, yes.

I have no objection to -- in a class of religious education -- a neutral teacher (who is not allowed to push their religion) saying: "Some people believe the world was created six thousand years ago..." Then, lesson two: "Some people believe in the watchmaker argument..." Lesson three: "Some people believe in gap creationism...", and so on.

You mean:

1) No transitional fossils exist:

"Though evolutionists have been searching for transitional fossils for more than 100 years, they have found none,"

That's a lie, BTW.

2) Nessie exists and disproves evolution

Have you heard of the ‘Loch Ness Monster’ in Scotland? ‘Nessie,’ for short, has been recorded on sonar from a small submarine, described by eyewitnesses, and photographed by others. Nessie appears to be a plesiosaur.

3) People who believe in evolution are lying

"Because evolutionists do not want to believe the only alternative – that the universe was created by God – they declare evolution is a fact and believe its impossible claims without any scientific proof!"[...] We have a risen Christ, unquestionable proofs and, as if we needed it, God has thrown in a host of inarguable evidences all around us!"

4) Humans and dinosaurs lived together

“Biblical and scientific evidence seems to indicate that men and dinosaurs lived at the same time…. Fossilized tracks in the bed of the Paluxy River near Glen Rose, Texas, also give evidence that men and dinosaurs existed simultaneously. [...]That dinosaurs existed with humans is an important discovery disproving the evolutionists’ theory that dinosaurs lived 70 million years before man. God created dinosaurs on the sixth day. He created man later the same day.”

You want kids learning this? In Science?

When most people know the truth they inevitably begin to effectively harm each other.

All societies that don't have full Machiavellianism (there are a few exceptions such as mainland China) have uniform pro-social myths that all but a few STEM & philosophy folks believe in. You can of course get rid of Christianity but then you have to put something else such as blank slatism in or people will actually get blackpilled and defect against each other en masse.

You're assuming that belief in evolution, and wishing to emphasise science in science classes, is inherently anti-religious.

It isn't.

Recent research has found that belief in creationism is an increasingly marginal belief, whether religious or not (Pew found that only 11% of Catholics and 16% of white mainline Protestants believe in creationism; 18% of the USA as a whole).

There's no need to portray science and faith as being pitted against one another.

[Onitsha Empire]

When most people know the truth they inevitably begin to effectively harm each other.

All societies that don't have full Machiavellianism (there are a few exceptions such as mainland China) have uniform pro-social myths that all but a few STEM & philosophy folks believe in. You can of course get rid of Christianity but then you have to put something else such as blank slatism in or people will actually get blackpilled and defect against each other en masse.

Societies depend on lies to exist. When people know enough truths there won't even be marriages or children, let alone societies.

How remarkably absurd.

Nope. This isn't absurd at all. Knowledge is not inherently anti-social. However knowledge about societies is. However since knowledge about nature positively correlates with knowledge about societies when there is enough knowledge about nature Machiavellianism tends to follow. Widespread Machiavellianism has taken place many times in human history and it is usually before the downfall of a great civilization due to depleted social unity.

[Geneviev]

I'd prefer for it to be taught in a different class, and Nessie is nonsense, but other than that, yes.

I have no objection to -- in a class of religious education -- a neutral teacher (who is not allowed to push their religion) saying: "Some people believe the world was created six thousand years ago..." Then, lesson two: "Some people believe in the watchmaker argument..." Lesson three: "Some people believe in gap creationism...", and so on.

That seems to be the best compromise on this issue.

[Onitsha Empire]

I'd prefer for it to be taught in a different class, and Nessie is nonsense, but other than that, yes.

I have no objection to -- in a class of religious education -- a neutral teacher (who is not allowed to push their religion) saying: "Some people believe the world was created six thousand years ago..." Then, lesson two: "Some people believe in the watchmaker argument..." Lesson three: "Some people believe in gap creationism...", and so on.

When most people know the truth they inevitably begin to effectively harm each other.

All societies that don't have full Machiavellianism (there are a few exceptions such as mainland China) have uniform pro-social myths that all but a few STEM & philosophy folks believe in. You can of course get rid of Christianity but then you have to put something else such as blank slatism in or people will actually get blackpilled and defect against each other en masse.

You're assuming that belief in evolution, and wishing to emphasise science in science classes, is inherently anti-religious.

It isn't.

Recent research has found that belief in creationism is an increasingly marginal belief, whether religious or not (Pew found that only 11% of Catholics and 16% of white mainline Protestants believe in creationism; 18% of the USA as a whole).

There's no need to portray science and faith as being pitted against one another.

Knowledge isn't inherently anti-religious. After all in a theistic universe knowledge can obviously still exist. Deities and knowledge can obviously coexist.

However too much knowledge is against how human societies are organized. Human societies don't inherently have to be founded on lies. However in reality shared myths and shared falsehood tend to be what human societies are based on. When you take them away you get a Hobbesian world.

[The Grims]

I have no objection to -- in a class of religious education -- a neutral teacher (who is not allowed to push their religion) saying: "Some people believe the world was created six thousand years ago..." Then, lesson two: "Some people believe in the watchmaker argument..." Lesson three: "Some people believe in gap creationism...", and so on.

That seems to be the best compromise on this issue.

Why would teaching the ancient Greek and the Hindu creation myths and not mentioning evolution or creationism at all not be a superior solution ?

[Geneviev]

That seems to be the best compromise on this issue.

Why would teaching the ancient Greek and the Hindu creation myths and not mentioning evolution or creationism at all not be a superior solution ?

More people believe in evolution and creationism in the US.

[The Free Joy State]

That seems to be the best compromise on this issue.

Why would teaching the ancient Greek and the Hindu creation myths and not mentioning evolution or creationism at all not be a superior solution ?

For clarity, my solution would include teaching all other religions and their myths.

Comparative religious studies are actually quite an interesting subject to study, if taught neutrally.

[The Grims]

Why would teaching the ancient Greek and the Hindu creation myths and not mentioning evolution or creationism at all not be a superior solution ?

More people believe in evolution and creationism in the US.

So the argument is popularity ?

[Geneviev]

More people believe in evolution and creationism in the US.

So the argument is popularity ?

It's generally more important to understand what people around you believe, so yes.

[Onitsha Empire]

I'd prefer for it to be taught in a different class, and Nessie is nonsense, but other than that, yes.

I have no objection to -- in a class of religious education -- a neutral teacher (who is not allowed to push their religion) saying: "Some people believe the world was created six thousand years ago..." Then, lesson two: "Some people believe in the watchmaker argument..." Lesson three: "Some people believe in gap creationism...", and so on.

When most people know the truth they inevitably begin to effectively harm each other.

All societies that don't have full Machiavellianism (there are a few exceptions such as mainland China) have uniform pro-social myths that all but a few STEM & philosophy folks believe in. You can of course get rid of Christianity but then you have to put something else such as blank slatism in or people will actually get blackpilled and defect against each other en masse.

You're assuming that belief in evolution, and wishing to emphasise science in science classes, is inherently anti-religious.

It isn't.

Recent research has found that belief in creationism is an increasingly marginal belief, whether religious or not (Pew found that only 11% of Catholics and 16% of white mainline Protestants believe in creationism; 18% of the USA as a whole).

There's no need to portray science and faith as being pitted against one another.

Comparative studies of numerous religions leads to agnosticism.

Comparative studies of numerous history textbooks all over the world leads people to be skeptical of any narrative any society pushes.

That is, you are destroying even more social unity and enabling even more Machiavellianism and Hobbesianism than Pastafarians and nominal Satanists by imparting people knowledge. r/atheism preaches atheism using poor arguments and they aren't inculcating people against humanist and SJ dogmas which is why they are only moderately harmful to a society. Your stance on the other hand is even more harmful.

[The Grims]

Why would teaching the ancient Greek and the Hindu creation myths and not mentioning evolution or creationism at all not be a superior solution ?

For clarity, my solution would include teaching all other religions and their myths.

Comparative religious studies are actually quite an interesting subject to study, if taught neutrally.

Your solution is impossible then - there are trillions of variations. One would have to choose. To make such a choice one needs criteria, like popularity, use to society, accuracy, age etc.

[The Free Joy State]

So the argument is popularity ?

It's generally more important to understand what people around you believe, so yes.

So, you'd have no objection to teaching the religious beliefs of other religions in the USA: Jewish people, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jainism?

[Necroghastia]

3. The evidence is in the fossil record.

Where.

[Geneviev]

It's generally more important to understand what people around you believe, so yes.

So, you'd have no objection to teaching the religious beliefs of other religions in the USA: Jewish people, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jainism?

That would be a good thing if they're taught.

[The Grims]

So the argument is popularity ?

It's generally more important to understand what people around you believe, so yes.

So not truthfullness, practical use etc ?

[The Free Joy State]

For clarity, my solution would include teaching all other religions and their myths.

Comparative religious studies are actually quite an interesting subject to study, if taught neutrally.

Your solution is impossible then - there are trillions of variations. One would have to choose. To make such a choice one needs criteria, like popularity, use to society, accuracy, age etc.

Yeah, I should have specified. I meant world religions. Not that impossible. I was taught comparative world religious studies when I was a teen.

[Geneviev]

It's generally more important to understand what people around you believe, so yes.

So not truthfullness, practical use etc ?

Those too.

[The Grims]

Your solution is impossible then - there are trillions of variations. One would have to choose. To make such a choice one needs criteria, like popularity, use to society, accuracy, age etc.

Yeah, I should have specified. I meant world religions. Not that impossible. I was taught comparative world religious studies when I was a teen.

But you were not told all. And in addition to religion you would also need to teach stories from fiction, like Stargate or Discworld or Mass Effect.

[Onitsha Empire]

Your solution is impossible then - there are trillions of variations. One would have to choose. To make such a choice one needs criteria, like popularity, use to society, accuracy, age etc.

Yeah, I should have specified. I meant world religions. Not that impossible. I was taught comparative world religious studies when I was a teen.

You should have been taught comparative secular pro-social myths studies too. Unlike religion which can actually be factually accurate they aren't even myths for they are often falsificable..and outright clearly false. The social left blatantly lie in order to deceive and benefit..so does the social right. Everyone benefits from everyone else being stupid enough to trust them.

Of course you haven't. Otherwise the world would have been full of Machiavellians and learned sociopaths.

[The Caleshan Valkyrie]

How remarkably absurd.

Nope. This isn't absurd at all.

Yes, it is. It is fucking nuts.

[Kowani]

Yeah, I should have specified. I meant world religions. Not that impossible. I was taught comparative world religious studies when I was a teen.

You should have been taught comparative secular pro-social myths studies too. Unlike religion which can actually be factually accurate

And I thought “climate change was fake”,was going to be the most ridiculous thing I saw today.

they aren't even myths for they are often falsificable..and outright clearly false.

Citation needed.

The social left blatantly lie in order to deceive and benefit..so does the social right.

Citation needed.

Everyone benefits from everyone else being stupid enough to trust them.

“We shouldn’t trust scientists because reasons!”

Of course you haven't. Otherwise the world would have been full of Machiavellians and learned sociopaths.

Machiavelli would be disappointed with your surface level understanding.

[The Free Joy State]

Yeah, I should have specified. I meant world religions. Not that impossible. I was taught comparative world religious studies when I was a teen.

But you were not told all. And in addition to religion you would also need to teach stories from fiction, like Stargate or Discworld or Mass Effect.

I do not see the relevance of Stargate.

In the UK, comparative religious education is found in schools -- state schools; it focuses on the main ones found in the country. It's not aimed at promoting religion, but outlining the beliefs with regards to various issues and then getting students to debate, discuss contrasting views and explore what they think.

Let it be clear, I am actually not arguing for creationism. I'm adamant creationism should never be taught as science, in any school. But -- if it is to be taught -- it's best that it's taught as part of comparative R.E. (where lessons can also explain that many religious people do not believe in it).