What do you believe? Do you think teaching evolution in Biology classes in high school is acceptible? Discuss the topic and your opinion, but please keep it clean.
At my high school we're taught evolution alongside the belief that the Earth was created by a diety. So I'm ok with evolution being taught in high schools.
Please don't turn this into a big argument about whether evolution is real or not. Thanks!
Just checking, you were not serious when you said "I agree with evolution, but who created the monkeys?", right?
No... I agree with the theory that we evolved from monkeys, but who created the monkeys that we evolved from? Is what i was trying to say, I just worded it poorly.
I am an atheist, and I believe in evolution. But I do not believe Evolution should be taught in public schools because it would violate the right to freedom of religion.
I am an atheist, and I believe in evolution. But I do not believe Evolution should be taught in public schools because it would violate the right to freedom of religion.
Jez someone with a brain about time, either teach both or teach neither or else the freedom of religion is a bit affected.
I am an atheist, and I believe in evolution. But I do not believe Evolution should be taught in public schools because it would violate the right to freedom of religion.
This makes no sense, whatsoever. If anything violates freedom of religion, it would be teaching a religious doctrine to people as fact from a governmental perspective - you know, what teaching creationism would be.
Scientists believe that there was a common ancestor. Meaning, both humans and monkeys evolved from the same species.
Exactly. We didn't evolve from monkeys. "Monkeys" as we think of them and "humans" as we know them have a common ancestor that quite possibly resembled neither the modern-day monkey nor human.
This makes no sense, whatsoever. If anything violates freedom of religion, it would be teaching a religious doctrine to people as fact from a governmental perspective - you know, what teaching creationism would be.
But it wouldn't be taught as fact just like evolution should be now. It's not a fact so don't teach it as one not that i particularly side with a certain theory but thats what they both are theories.
Jez someone with a brain about time, either teach both or teach neither or else the freedom of religion is a bit affected.
So if someone's religious belief is that the world is flat, should we abstain from teaching them the very true fact that the world is, in fact, round?
No. The right to believe is fair and good, but your right to blatantly misrepresent the facts and spread unscientific nonsense has no place in a scientific setting.
In other words, freedom of religion is not the freedom for the government-run public school system to teach anything that anyone might possibly believe religiously. We teach science in science class, and keep the religion in church.
But it wouldn't be taught as fact just like evolution should be now. It's not a fact so don't teach it as one not that i particularly side with a certain theory but thats what they both are theories.
*sigh*
The term "theory" in a scientific context, such as the "Theory of Evolution" is in no way, shape, or form the same as a Creationist theory.
A scientific theory is "...a well supported body of interconnected statements that explains observations and can be used to make testable predictions."
Please, please explain to me how a creationist doctrine meets that standard.
No. The right to believe is fair and good, but your right to blatantly misrepresent the facts and spread unscientific nonsense has no place in a scientific setting.
REALLY!! ugh come on now i honestly am about at the point of being an evolutionist because more things point to it being true, BUT creationism is NOT without evidence don't call it nonsense or unscientfic when i would bet my life on the fact you've never actually studied it. Know what your arguing against before your argue against it.
Razaki, even though i believe in evolution, I aknowledge that evolution is merely a THEORY. It has enough evidence that I and many other people believe in it, but it cannot be seen as the ULTIMATE truth. And therefore by teaching it,we would calling christianity a lie(even though I believe it is, we just shouldn't teaching in public school) therefore voilating they're rights to believe that god did whatever he did.
REALLY!! ugh come on now i honestly am about at the point of being an evolutionist because more things point to it being true, BUT creationism is NOT without evidence don't call it nonsense or unscientfic when i would bet my life on the fact you've never actually studied it. Know what your arguing against before your argue against it.
Really, sir?
Considering I attended a private, Christian school until high school, studied the majority of the works of people like Kent Hovind, Ken Ham, and the rest over at AiG, and am currently an Evolutionary Biology major, I DO believe I in fact know exactly what it is I'm arguing against and for.
What surprises me is that you somehow think that creationism actually has evidence that supports it, yet you consider yourself an almost-evolutionist. Creationist viewpoints have been roundly debunked by scientists around the world for years now, and are continuing to be debunked by the day, wasting valuable resources and manpower that could be spent elsewhere, not to mention the legal issues that have plagued the U.S. in recent years.
Razaki, even though i believe in evolution, I aknowledge that evolution is merely a THEORY. It has enough evidence that I and many other people believe in it, but it cannot be seen as the ULTIMATE truth. And therefore by teaching it,we would calling christianity a lie(even though I believe it is, we just shouldn't teaching in public school) therefore voilating they're rights to believe that god did whatever he did.
What is this "ultimate" truth? You will never prove something to an absolute 100% degree, simply because it's logically impossible, but evolution is a scientific fact. We may have different theories about how evolution occurs, but evolution itself, being the slow gradual change of species over long periods of time - that's a fact.
Again, I ask my question again to you, communist09: the fact that a certain sect of people believes that god did something means that we can't teach a scientific theory that says otherwise?
So, to use the wonderfully sarcastic example of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, should we abstain from teaching the principles of the Greenhouse effect, greenhouse gases, and climate change because they might offend those who rather think that it's due to the ratio of pirates to ninjas?
Considering I attended a private, Christian school until high school, studied the majority of the works of people like Kent Hovind, Ken Ham, and the rest over at AiG, and am currently an Evolutionary Biology major, I DO believe I in fact know exactly what it is I'm arguing against and for.
What surprises me is that you somehow think that creationism actually has evidence that supports it, yet you consider yourself an almost-evolutionist. Creationist viewpoints have been roundly debunked by scientists around the world for years now, and are continuing to be debunked by the day, wasting valuable resources and manpower that could be spent elsewhere, not to mention the legal issues that have plagued the U.S. in recent years.
Then I stand corrected. However I've yet to see creationism ever proven wrong and evolution proven right, until this day i'll always remain skeptic of both and hold both on a somewhat equal level of scientific standing.
Then I stand corrected. However I've yet to see creationism ever proven wrong and evolution proven right, until this day i'll always remain skeptic of both and hold both on a somewhat equal level of scientific standing.
Fair enough.
Creationism will never be proven wrong, though, because it is theoretically impossible to completely prove anything like it wrong. Similarly, the Flying Spaghetti Monster will never be proven wrong - but that does not mean it is in any way reasonable to believe in its validity.
To clarify, then, unless creationism is absolutely proven completely wrong, you will hold it on equal scientific standing to evolution, despite the overwhelming evidence?
