- Posts: 15740
- Thank you received: 319
plaidvillain wrote:
CinnamonGirl wrote: First, I was not talking to you directly I was speaking as a group and this is not about specifics. What we all should do to fix the controversy is to teach both as theories or leave them both out. You want your way and you said you think it is based on science. Others don't agree with you but you still want your way on this. That is my point.
"Intelligent design" is not an equal alternative to science. It is Christian dogma and has no place in public schools. This is not about anyone getting "their way", it is about facts and science. This is significantly off-topic from the conversation. If you'd like to discuss faith vs science, perhaps a new topic would be appropriate.
Okay, then point out where anyone on this board has made fun of Creationists because earlier you said this "Let's go back through this forum at all the times you made fun of creationists and are forcing them to believe what you believe." - it sure didn't seem like you meant the collective internet with that statement and I was replying to the statement as you wrote it for my own posts because I wasn't going to take responsibility for others' posts here on this subject. Attributing what others out on the internet have said to those of us on this board is flat-out wrong to do - that's making patent generalizations about us hereCinnamonGirl wrote: First, I was not talking to you directly I was speaking as a group
I find that this is usually what someone says when they've made a blanket statement that they can't back up with facts. If you meant the collective internet, then why did you say "this forum"?CinnamonGirl wrote: and this is not about specifics.
The only "controversy" is the one manufactured by the Creationists in order to push their agenda. Do you think we should teach English in Chemistry class? History in math? Do you think that we should teach that we are held down not by gravity, but by God's will?CinnamonGirl wrote: What we all should do to fix the controversy is to teach both as theories or leave them both out. You want your way and you said you think it is based on science. Others don't agree with you but you still want your way on this. That is my point.
1. The aim of this resolution is not to question or to fight a belief – the right to freedom of belief does not permit that. The aim is to warn against certain tendencies to pass off a belief as science. It is necessary to separate belief from science. It is not a matter of antagonism. Science and belief must be able to coexist. It is not a matter of opposing belief and science, but it is necessary to prevent belief from opposing science.
"All things equal"...like in youth soccer, where it's okay to reward everyone for participating, and no one learns the value of pride in a job well done by placing first and getting recognized for that, or disappointment of losing as motivation to try harder. That leads to kids not learning to take responsibility for their own actions which leads to not understanding that they are held accountable for their own actions and that there is a difference between right or wrong. [sarcasm]No, we must protect the children from disappointment by including everyone[/sarcasm]7. There is a real risk of serious confusion being introduced into our children’s minds between what has to do with convictions, beliefs, ideals of all sorts and what has to do with science. An “all things are equal” attitude may seem appealing and tolerant, but is in fact dangerous.
Exactly. If you want to honestly teach challenges to evolution, then teach students how to perform rigorous experiments that explain how the universe works in another manner than evolving, how to critically analyze data, and form conclusions based solidly on that data - it should be challenged with scientifically backed data, not with notions that some "higher power" created everything - that's religion and it doesn't belong in a science class. This isn't about pushing my agenda, this is about common sense and the law. Our founding fathers established separation of church and state, religion is to be taught on personal time, not in schools, and certainly not in science class.15. The teaching of all phenomena concerning evolution as a fundamental scientific theory is therefore crucial to the future of our societies and our democracies. For that reason it must occupy a central position in the curriculums, and especially in the science syllabuses, as long as, like any other theory, it is able to stand up to thorough scientific scrutiny.
I didn't come up with this claim all on my own you know . What else would they be trying to do? Push religion, or undermine science by contesting only some theories and not others because they see it as a threat - that's the two possibilities. Do you see Creationists asking that gravity or relativity not be taught? No. And why is that? Because it doesn't threaten their agenda like they think evolution does. The cherry-picking is blatantly obvious. If you are going to question evolution, which has as much data proving it true as relativity or gravity (which are also theories) and not relativity or gravity, then your group has an agenda and it must be challenged. Figuring that out requires no assumptions, just looking at the big picture of what that group is asking, and not asking, to do.CinnamonGirl wrote: [quoteemSC]What they are NOT allowed to do, is to wrap it up in the guise of "alternative theories of science" and use it to push their religion in science education when it's not science. I don't get how that's "picking and choosing what can and can't be allowed".[/quoteem]
Assuming they are pushing religion is your problem. Assumptions always are the problem.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Science Chic wrote: Creationism. is. not. a. theory. or. a. science; it. should. not. be. taught. in. a. science. class, feel free to teach it at home or at church as much as you like. Evolution is science, and should be taught in science class. Creationism and Intelligent Design are not theories, they cannot be tested by experiment, there are no observations to make and perform experiments on, they cannot be proved or disproved. This isn't just "my" way, or those on this board who have said something similar, every major science organization stands by this claim, as does the National Center for Science Education.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Science Chic wrote: Evolution is science, and should be taught in science class. .
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
LadyJazzer wrote: There's a very vocal minority that think the earth is flat. There's a very vocal minority that think any number of things. Creation MYTHS are "myths." Myths do not belong in school, particularly in science classes. "Facing the world" should not include "creation myths from around the world", or even the kind of insanity that causes some wackos to picket the funerals of dead soldiers.
Keep your myths out of the science classes.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.