Creationism in Public Schools

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Maybe you been time traveling and aren’t ‘fessing up to it.

Oh no! Who are you?! Are you someone from 100,000 AD? Has humanity gone extinct? Or are we at a second Big Bang?!

It’s a secret. :3

Catholic school graduate. Creationism wasn’t ever mentioned or studied at school. There was no need to and, afaik, no one was forced to believe anything. We were just expected to learn our assignments, and pass our classes in preparation for the future.

[Jolthig]

If you mention them in a historical context, for example, fine. No need to explain anything further. In a science class? Nah. No place.

To understand the actions of religions in history, you still need to have an idea of what they believe.

Sure but not everyone is interested in the topic of religion, and I say that as a religious Ahmadi Muslim.

[Jolthig]

Oh no! Who are you?! Are you someone from 100,000 AD? Has humanity gone extinct? Or are we at a second Big Bang?!

It’s a secret. :3

Catholic school graduate. Creationism wasn’t ever mentioned or studied at school. There was no need to and, afaik, no one was forced to believe anything. We were just expected to learn our assignments, and pass our classes in preparation for the future.

Interesting so a fellow theistic evolutionist like me?

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

If you mention them in a historical context, for example, fine. No need to explain anything further. In a science class? Nah. No place.

To understand the actions of religions in history, you still need to have an idea of what they believe.

Other than say this is group A and they believe or believed this, there’s no need to go any further.

[Tekania]

At least Theistic Evolution attempts to be scientific in nature.

No it doesn't. It just puts lots of long words in to try to fool people who don't understand science into thinking that it's scientific. It's a con trick, pure and simple.

I wouln't not call it a con, I've not generally known Theistic Evolutionists to pretend like their theology replaces the science. They are generally fairly good at keeping science and theology separate. Unlike Day-agers and Young Earth Creationists.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

It’s a secret. :3

Catholic school graduate. Creationism wasn’t ever mentioned or studied at school. There was no need to and, afaik, no one was forced to believe anything. We were just expected to learn our assignments, and pass our classes in preparation for the future.

Interesting so a fellow theistic evolutionist like me?

Actually I’m an agnostic.

[Washington Resistance Army]

It’s a secret. :3

Catholic school graduate. Creationism wasn’t ever mentioned or studied at school. There was no need to and, afaik, no one was forced to believe anything. We were just expected to learn our assignments, and pass our classes in preparation for the future.

Interesting so a fellow theistic evolutionist like me?

afaik most of the religious people on NS presumably subscribe to theistic evolution

[Jolthig]

Interesting so a fellow theistic evolutionist like me?

Actually I’m an agnostic.

Ah. Personally, while I understand the methods of science and how theories work, I am not a Darwinist due to my religious beliefs of god guiding evolution and not chance. Of course, this isnt based off of science but my book and the teachings of Ahmadiyya, but otherwise, we so acknowledge macroevolution from a theistic viewpoint.

[Jolthig]

Interesting so a fellow theistic evolutionist like me?

afaik most of the religious people on NS presumably subscribe to theistic evolution

I see. Assuming you are one too as a pagan?

[HUElavia]

Evolution has been given scientific evidence, while Creationism does not have much (if any) scientific evidence.

Schools should be teaching what is scientifically shown, not some beliefs by some people.

I personally believe that God created evolution and that the amount of time God created the Universe might have been in days to him, but millions upon millions of years for us humans. I think the whole "Earth is 6,000 years old" statement is crap. Even more so if there is no scientific evidence backing it.

[Geneviev]

To understand the actions of religions in history, you still need to have an idea of what they believe.

Other than say this is group A and they believe or believed this, there’s no need to go any further.

Fair enough.

[Washington Resistance Army]

afaik most of the religious people on NS presumably subscribe to theistic evolution

I see. Assuming you are one too as a pagan?

Sure. Admittedly it's not a topic I think about much, if at all really, but I see no reason belief in the divine and evolution can't co-exist.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Actually I’m an agnostic.

Ah. Personally, while I understand the methods of science and how theories work, I am not a Darwinist due to my religious beliefs of god guiding evolution and not chance. Of course, this isnt based off of science but my book and the teachings of Ahmadiyya, but otherwise, we so acknowledge macroevolution from a theistic viewpoint.

I see a lot of reason and evidence in geology and the study of our planet carried by scientists. I don’t know if there is or if there isn’t a deity. The existence or non existence of a deity bears no weight in my day to day.

[Tekania]

Please don't call creationism an hypothesis. Hypothesis has a specific meaning in science. And something like creationism cannot meet the minimal standards of an hypothesis. For something to be an hypothesis it has to at least be falsifiable.

Actually, many versions of creationism are falsifiable: it just so happens that they've all been falsified. YEC being perhaps the most obvious.

In general however it isn't. Because their presuppositions are not subject or designed for testing. When they talk about apparent age for example there's no way to test if God created the universe with an a parent age for example. It's the equivalent to my Last-Tuesday-ism joke, whereby the universe was created ex-nihlo last Tuesday with all apparent age including all memories you think you have before that time. It's a non probable statement crafted to be untestable.... in that case for a joke, but it's more or less the essence of is creationism these days. A universe with deity involved presuppositions that cannot be falsifiable.

[Jolthig]

I see. Assuming you are one too as a pagan?

Sure. Admittedly it's not a topic I think about much, if at all really, but I see no reason belief in the divine and evolution can't co-exist.

Yeah, it's something I've recently been coming back to study on. Both Darwinian and the perspectives of the Ahmadiyya.

Ah. Personally, while I understand the methods of science and how theories work, I am not a Darwinist due to my religious beliefs of god guiding evolution and not chance. Of course, this isnt based off of science but my book and the teachings of Ahmadiyya, but otherwise, we so acknowledge macroevolution from a theistic viewpoint.

I see a lot of reason and evidence in geology and the study of our planet carried by scientists. I don’t know if there is or if there isn’t a deity. The existence or non existence of a deity bears no weight in my day to day.

So an apatheist?

[Aision]

creation science

No such thing.

However, many scientists believe that there is more scientific evidence for creation.

Completely wrong. Those "scientists" are very few, and zero of them in the many, many fields that falsify the creation myths of Genesis.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Sure. Admittedly it's not a topic I think about much, if at all really, but I see no reason belief in the divine and evolution can't co-exist.

Yeah, it's something I've recently been coming back to study on. Both Darwinian and the perspectives of the Ahmadiyya.

I see a lot of reason and evidence in geology and the study of our planet carried by scientists. I don’t know if there is or if there isn’t a deity. The existence or non existence of a deity bears no weight in my day to day.

So an apatheist?

I’ve been called that before. Yes.

[Jolthig]

Yeah, it's something I've recently been coming back to study on. Both Darwinian and the perspectives of the Ahmadiyya.


So an apatheist?

I’ve been called that before. Yes.

Ah, okay.

[Thermodolia]

Interesting so a fellow theistic evolutionist like me?

afaik most of the religious people on NS presumably subscribe to theistic evolution

There are thousands of us!!

[Jolthig]

afaik most of the religious people on NS presumably subscribe to theistic evolution

There are thousands of us!!

*high fives*

[Salandriagado]

I've never seen a connection between creationism and anti-vaxxers.

There are obvious links. Indeed, many of the mistakes at the heart of the antivax movement stem from not understanding evolutionary biology.

[Salandriagado]

Youd be surprised. Sometimes schools are mistaken to teach us what they think are facts. For example, if I recall correctly, the food pyramid is an outdated and inaccurate teaching that is still somehow being taught to children.

It didn't show that refined/vs whole grain thing, that was one of the primary things.

That, and you just don't need that much in the way of carbs at all.

Indeed, it's not outdated: it's fake. It was made up by the corn industry to sell more corn-based products.

[Europa Undivided]

At least Theistic Evolution attempts to be scientific in nature.

No it doesn't. It just puts lots of long words in to try to fool people who don't understand science into thinking that it's scientific. It's a con trick, pure and simple.

Meh, it is just saying that God was the one that started it all and everything went on according to the laws of nature. There is no denial of science here, however you define it. All that happened was that "nothing" was replaced with something.

It is scientific and is a reconciliation of science and belief. Continually screaming that it is a con trick is like saying that the moon landings never happened; in short, a conspiracy theory.

[Europa Undivided]

I've never seen a connection between creationism and anti-vaxxers.

There are obvious links. Indeed, many of the mistakes at the heart of the antivax movement stem from not understanding evolutionary biology.

Wasn't the antovax movement coming from that research paper in the Lancet?

[Salandriagado]

It's a part of Christianity, and different religious beliefs should be taught in public schools.

Why? What is the significant public benefit in teaching it, why can't other means provide this, and why does that benefit outweigh the benefits of whatever you're going to miss off the curriculum to fit it in?