Forums

ForumsWorld Events, Politics, Religion, Etc.

Is it OK to teach evolution in public schools?

Posted Jan 8, '13 at 12:33am

Kasic

Kasic

5,740 posts

It is not a fact and therefor should not be treated as such like it is.


Evolution -is- a fact.

Only facts should be taught, the facts of it should be while the guess work shouldn't be


Please give us some examples of said "guesswork."

it should be clearly stated that they aren't facts by any means.


Except, again, what is being taught are facts.

making sure that theories are understood to be nothing more than theories.


A scientific theory isn't the same as some theory a random person makes up.

Anyone who says "nothing more than theories" doesn't understand that a theory is the highest things go in science. Theories describe processes. They are not "guesses." Some parts may be inaccurate, and if they are they are revised when found, but the entire idea itself is basically indisputable.
 

Posted Jan 8, '13 at 1:23am

Masterforger

Masterforger

1,856 posts

It is not a fact and therefor should not be treated as such like it is. Only facts should be taught, the facts of it should be while the guess work shouldn't be or if it is it should be clearly stated that they aren't facts by any means. Since there is much debate on creation Vs evolution being taught then it should be as unbiased as possible teaching that which is fact and making sure that theories are understood to be nothing more than theories.

Theory is, as Kasic said, the highest things go in science. Also, considering how long the theory has survived, I kinda think the scientists are trusting it more then the idea that everything was made in a week. Face it, every biologist uses evolutionary ideas in his/her work, and though certain parts of evolution might be wrong (not much to go wrong, it's basically the idea that animals and other living things can change due to the environment to suit) the basic idea behind it is indefatigable.
 

Posted Jan 8, '13 at 3:35am

MageGrayWolf

MageGrayWolf

9,782 posts

Knight

if you dont go in the history and only stay in the present. i dont see why evolution would have a meaning in it.

i mean... to understand what a flower is and how it works. or to know how a human body works, you dont need evolution.


You would be getting a rather incomplete picture by not including it. For instance with your example of how the human body works. Some aspect such as vestigial features aren't going to make much sense without including a reference to evolution.


If you consider your faith weak and fragile as such, maybe you should change it to a stronger one.
To quote a personal friend of mine

[quote] I find your lack of faith, disturbing.
[/quote]

You're friends with Darth Vader?

I think hereditary stuff is taught first year, but that's it for sex stuff.


That s for a science class. The study of heredity in biology is genetics.

It is not a fact and therefor should not be treated as such like it is.


Yes it is. It's both fact and theory.
Evolution: Fact and Theory

Since there is much debate on creation Vs evolution being taught then it should be as unbiased as possible teaching that which is fact and making sure that theories are understood to be nothing more than theories.


This debate is only on a general public level, there is no real debate in the scientific community.
Creationism is nothing but biased.
A theory is the highest thing you can have in science as it offers explanation for the facts.
 

Posted Jan 8, '13 at 9:03am

partydevil

partydevil

5,130 posts

You would be getting a rather incomplete picture by not including it. For instance with your example of how the human body works. Some aspect such as vestigial features aren't going to make much sense without including a reference to evolution.


vestigial features have lost all or almost all their functions. they are not really needed when you explain how a body works.
only exception i can think of is the appendix. and our body still works whitout it tho.
 

Posted Jan 8, '13 at 9:47am

TheMostManlyMan

TheMostManlyMan

4,749 posts

Ok Kasic you wanted an example so here's an example. There's absolutely no semi-logic reason as to how all the mass got there in the first place, leaving your best assumption that it came in a poof.

 

Posted Jan 8, '13 at 12:05pm

HahiHa

HahiHa

5,305 posts

Knight

vestigial features have lost all or almost all their functions. they are not really needed when you explain how a body works.

Yes, if your class is orientated very practically. But just imagine anatomy class without telling where the vestigial parts come from. Besides, students ought to ask questions, and the question of the "why" and "where from" is always a pertinent one.

There's absolutely no semi-logic reason as to how all the mass got there in the first place, leaving your best assumption that it came in a poof.

What the heck does that have to do with evolution?
 

Posted Jan 8, '13 at 1:09pm

Kasic

Kasic

5,740 posts

There's absolutely no semi-logic reason as to how all the mass got there in the first place,


And that has absolutely nothing to do with the theory of evolution.

Next misconception please.
 

Posted Jan 8, '13 at 1:18pm

TheMostManlyMan

TheMostManlyMan

4,749 posts

Never mind, that is often interchanged with the Big Bang theory.

 

Posted Jan 8, '13 at 1:19pm

Kasic

Kasic

5,740 posts

Never mind, that is often interchanged with the Big Bang theory.


Only by people who aren't well versed in what they are talking about.

Go on though, I'm quite curious what parts of evolution are "guesswork" and should not be taught as fact.
 

Posted Jan 8, '13 at 1:29pm

partydevil

partydevil

5,130 posts

Yes, if your class is orientated very practically.

1st year, so, yes i think so.

Besides, students ought to ask questions, and the question of the "why" and "where from" is always a pertinent one.

we had to be silent during class.
this sure is a improvement in the system on some fields.
 
Reply to Is it OK to teach evolution in public schools?

You must be logged in to post a reply!