ForumsWEPRIs it OK to teach evolution in public schools?

364 125632
shortstopkid123
offline
shortstopkid123
20 posts
Nomad

Many parents argue about schools teaching evolution. Creationalists do not support or believe in the theory of evolution. It goes against their beliefs. They do not believe it should be taught because it apposes many peoples' beliefs. Do you think that it should be taught?

Notes:
Lets try not point out certain religions. I am saying creationalists for a reason.

  • 364 Replies
TheMostManlyMan
offline
TheMostManlyMan
5,841 posts
Chamberlain

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.

HahiHa
offline
HahiHa
8,256 posts
Regent

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?
Kasic
offline
Kasic
5,552 posts
Jester

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.
TheMostManlyMan
offline
TheMostManlyMan
5,841 posts
Chamberlain

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

Kasic
offline
Kasic
5,552 posts
Jester

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.
partydevil
offline
partydevil
5,129 posts
Jester

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.
TheMostManlyMan
offline
TheMostManlyMan
5,841 posts
Chamberlain

No, for this particular thread I think that's enough. After all that is one of he first things that should have been answered before the theory went any further. I'll be putting the rest in the theism and atheism thread.

Kasic
offline
Kasic
5,552 posts
Jester

No, for this particular thread I think that's enough


So what you're saying is, despite that you've given no examples of "guesswork" in evolution, that's enough?

After all that is one of he first things that should have been answered before the theory went any further.


Where everything came from is a separate matter (haha) than how stuff works.

If you have the ingredients for a cake but don't know where the ingredients came from, you can still make said cake.

If you find an ancient city and don't know who built it, that doesn't change the fact that there is a city and glimpses of their lives can be seen from what's in the houses, if they were buried, etc.

Origins are separate from functioning.
HahiHa
offline
HahiHa
8,256 posts
Regent

Ya. We don't need to know where matter came from; we can look at the existing life (a basis that is sure enough existing, and don't come up with all that philosophy stuff now, mkey?) and develop the theory of evolution to explain how that life behaves over time. Combined with paleontology we can even retrace bits of its history. How life even started is another matter not involved in the theory of evolution, but in that of abiogenesis. And the thing with the matter is a problem of the theory of the big bang. All three theories can be studied and taught independently of each other.

MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,462 posts
Farmer

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


So you don't think that how the body is put together is an important first step in how it works? to leave out vestigial features when explain the human body paints an incomplete picture, even when talking about it on a basic level.

we had to be silent during class.
this sure is a improvement in the system on some fields.


If you're in a class that doesn't set aside some time to allow for questions, that doesn't sound like a very good class.

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.


As mentioned this doesn't really have anything to do with evolution but, no that isn't our best guess. There are a number of hypotheses dealing with the matter/energy of our universe.

After all that is one of he first things that should have been answered before the theory went any further.


the theory doesn't start at this point. It starts at the point of life existing and deals with how it diversified.

The way your framing this is a bit like saying before you answer how a car works we should first know where the materials for the car come from. While it is a good question to ask it's not required for what is being dealt with.
partydevil
offline
partydevil
5,129 posts
Jester

to sum it up:
big bang - start of the universe.
abiogenesis - start of life.
evolution - how that life behaves over time.

partydevil
offline
partydevil
5,129 posts
Jester

So you don't think that how the body is put together is an important first step in how it works?

it's not what i think but what i remember.

If you're in a class that doesn't set aside some time to allow for questions, that doesn't sound like a very good class.

it's just the way things go.
we had homework class every day for a hour where we could ask questions.
thugtastic
offline
thugtastic
162 posts
Peasant

I think it is the most logical perspective on the last few million years and I am a Roman Catholic which is a religion that many people accuse of Creationism.
Of course I think it is proper to teach this in public schools.

partydevil
offline
partydevil
5,129 posts
Jester

which is a religion that many people accuse of Creationism.

accuse?¿?
your saying you do not believe god is the creator of everything, and your catholic?

you know, god made the earth, the sun, life and light. and whatever more is in that list. ending whit a day of rest.
or what side vision of roman catholic do you have? =S
Kasic
offline
Kasic
5,552 posts
Jester

your saying you do not believe god is the creator of everything, and your catholic?


Usually when people say Creationists they're referring to those who think the world is ~7000 years old.

Even though technically almost every religion has a creation story.
Showing 91-105 of 364