A Question For Atheists On…?
I was wondering what your views are on Evolution being taught as a fact, as is usually the case now, or as a theory amongst other theories on the origen of life. I am a Christian and believe at one point we were created, but that is not applicable to my question. My question really deals with do you believe that evolution should be taught as a theory alongside other scientific theories seperate from evolution to promote critical thinking for children who could come up with more plausible theories or proof to carry them in the scientific world as they progress in life so as to stimulate curiosity for other solutions? I ask this after readin a bill passed in Louisiana that occurred some months back. I am aware it was creationists way of slipping it in, but that is not what my topic is on. My topic is more on the line of it evolution being taught as theory to allow childrens minds for more critical thinking as opposed to accepting and disregarding because they assume something is a fact? Here is the link to the article I read:http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19926643.300-new-legal-threat-to-teaching-evolution-in-the-us.html?page=2….and here is a brief overview and description of the bill if anyone cares to read it:The Louisiana Science Education ActWHAT THE LAW SAYS:The state… shall allow and assist teachers, principals, and other school administrators to create and foster an environment… that promotes critical thinking skills, logical analysis, and open and objective discussion of scientific theories being studied, including, but not limited to, evolution, the origins of life, global warming, and human cloning. (Section 1B)WHAT OPPONENTS FEAR:Any Louisiana school official is now free to present evolution and other targeted topics as matters of debate rather than broadly accepted science. Books and other materials that support this view can be used in class alongside standard science texts. The onus will be on parents to spot violations of the rules on separation of church and state.The evolution of creationist literatureOne potential consequence of the 2008 Louisiana Science Education Act could be the appearance – possibly later this year – of anti-evolution textbooks such as “Explore Evolution: The arguments for and against Neo-Darwinism” in schools around the state.Textbooks lie at the centre of efforts by some religiously motivated groups to discredit evolution in US classrooms. Because of the constitutional principle providing for separation of church and state, evolution cannot be banned from state-funded schools on religious grounds. So the anti-evolution movement has sought to have its favoured alternative, “creation science”, taught alongside evolution.Over the years this approach has given rise to books that superficially resemble standard biology texts but with a creationist message. At first, they freely included the terms “creator” and “creationist” but after the US Supreme Court struck down Louisiana’s Balanced Treatment Act in 1987 this was no longer legally acceptable. The result was a new terminology and a new book, Of Pandas and People, first published in 1989, which avoided all mention of creationism in favour of the newly coined “intelligent design”. Some officials in the Dover Area School District in Pennsylvania (see main story) tried unsuccessfully to make a later edition of the book available to high-school biology students.Explore Evolution, published last year, represents the latest chapter in the story. It makes no mention of intelligent design but presents the same general argument – namely, that some features of life are too complex and too tailored to their environment to have arisen by natural selection – and presents evolution as an unresolved debate with credible alternatives.One excerpt from the book’s introductory chapter reads: “Looking at the evidence and comparing the competing explanations will provide the most reliable path to discovering which theory, if any, gives the best account of the evidence at hand. Making the comparison is your job. We’re asking you to be part scientist, part detective, and part juror.”How about if you taught evolution as being the most solid theory standing right now, but also teaching other theories. My point is in allowing the childrens minds to think critically for the future to explore alternatives or even explore evolution further?Since there seems to be a misconception let me state, I don’t believe the earth is only 6,000 years old and that it could be unprecidented time of age to it. When I say I am creationists, I mean as life starting from Gods hands…
I’m not an atheist but all physical evidence supports the theory of evolution. what other scientific theory about the development of life do you have in mind. that is based on physical evidence?.. there is none. Scientifically there is no dissenting evidence and that is why virtually the entire scientific community supports evolution theory.”Creationism” is run on ignorance about science altogether- from dishonesty or innocent misunderstanding. the version of evolution theory and science in general circulated by creationists is far from accurate to reality.Evolution is not a “fact”, but it is as much of a “fact” as Gravity theory. In science, theories are virtually opposite of a mere assumption. Scientific theories hold the highest merit in science as a framework of proven hypotheses that can predict future patterns, that has lasted through rigorous scrutiny in peer review. Remaining true to science, a “theory” in science does not ever claim to be a “fact” because “facts” imply it is unfalsifiable (dogma.) Plus, a theory in science embodies a scope of well-substantiated knowledge, not just one claim.The domain of science is phenomena in the natural/physical realm… so what does “life being started by God’s hands” have to do with science? It doesn’t belong in science classrooms… theology is not a scientific discussion. Science never conflicted with the concept of a Creator, and it never can, but throughout history science has often conflicted with physical phenomena religious people conjecture their God did in the physical world (like geocentrism and 6-day creationism).Science and theism (the belief in God per se) are compatible, though, as they occupy different domains.
*face palm
*
A scientific theory isn’t a mere speculation or guess.
Evolution is currently the most well-accepted-and-supported explanation regarding the way life diversified into its current forms.
Most “alternative explanations” are unfalsifiable and lack solid grounds for their arguments. They should therefore not be taught alongside evolution in school.
If an alternative explanation appears that is better supported than evolution, we should teach it instead of evolution.
Tldr
Can you please tell me what other SCIENTIFIC theories are out there that explains how living things have come to be the way they are on this Earth. Creation Science and Intelligent design do not count.
Answer that and show me verified scientific facts supporting it and then i may consider the possiblity of evolution to be taught as just another theory, as opposed to fact.
It is propositions such as these that are turning the USA into nothing but a joke. Almost every Christian in any other part of the world accepts evolution and the big bang as fact. I do not understand why American Christians are so stupid.
You are not expecting me to read ALL that right? i still have homework to do!
Bit of a problem there. The only other scientific theory that helps to explain the origins of life is the Big Bang theory.
Powered by Yahoo Answers
|
|
|
Categorised as: Homeschooling