Children should be taught about creationism in school, top scientist says

Children should be taught about creationism in school, top scientist says

This is from the Daily Mail, a british national right-wing newspaper.

What are everyone else’s views on the matter.

creationism should be taught as an example of non-scientific dogma, something to be understood and avoided, as it produces nothing of value, provides no insights and violates church/state separation doctrines. all forms of creationism should be brought forward as examples, especially obscure southeast asian versions.

Might be possible in England. In America, religious freedom in the Constitution prevents religious doctrines like creationism and ID from being taught in public schools.

Given that a Creator-less universe goes against scientific principles, I think that the fact that a Creator created everything should be taught in the schools.

Then we can get rid of that horrible word evolved as applied to species.

How does it go against scientific principles?

Personally, I believe our universe is among a very, very small fraction of all possible universe that is able to support life. Since we are here to watch Japanese Yu-Gi-Oh! episodes and complain about poverty, one can reasonably infer that it is necessary that our universe takes on parameters amiable for the development of life on a planet orbiting a G2 spectral class star. If not, I would not be here doing the aforementioned activities.

Nope, the anthropic principle isn’t an argument for creationism or intelligent design. Even though our universe is rather rare, I do not see any teleological “final cause” except the maximization of entropy and perhaps perpetual expansion.

The design argument is best countered with the problem of evil objection. And believe me, “sekai no itami” is an apt way to describe this world, thus I most certainly do not believe a benevolent God created “sekai no itami.”

Given that a Creator-less universe goes against scientific principles,

Show us that one. There is a creator, but science can’t demonstrate Him.

I think that the fact that a Creator created everything should be taught in the schools.

Not possible in public schools. Freedom of religion, you know.

Then we can get rid of that horrible word evolved as applied to species.

It’s directly observed to happen. Even honest creationists now admit that it’s a fact. Most of the “scientific creationists” now draw the line somewhere around family.

Please explain. As far as I know theoretical physisist believe the universe was created spontaneously in what they call the Bib Bang.

Scientific principal is that we should not believe anything that cannot be tested, the existance of God cannot be tested.

What doctrine. Is this something that the Church teaches?
I don’t think so, throughout history the Church has always been intertwined with the state. (Obviously not in the US though.) It still is in Ireland and Italy. (and in England with the protestant CofE)

Why obscure southeast asian versions?

Anything outside of empirical science should not be taught.

AlanF:

I stand corrected on the church/state doctrine issue. I’m US-centric by nature.

as to why obscure southeast asian versions? I believe in fair play. everyone’s creation myth should be taught as TRVTH or none at all.

If he was in America, he’d be way behind the times. All public schools are required to teach the various religious teachings on the creation of the world and of man alongside the various theories of evolution, without of course offending anyone. I think it’s a very good thing. It certainly helped me in my Science class. :slight_smile:

That isn’t true. Religion cannot be taught alongside evolution in US public schools. And there is one theory of evolution, not various theories.

And they are just that: THEORIES. The Big Bang and Evolution are both THEORIES meaning, in scientific terms, they have yet to be PROVEN. Faced with this reality, why would anyone, based on reason and logic, object to creationism being taught in public schools alongside with the Big Bang THEORY and the Evolution THEORY?

Because materialists believe on faith that our 5 senses can exhaust all reality, which is why they appeal to scientific data only, which often is found inaccurate and incomplete as new methods develop. Interestingly enough, the Big Bang, of which we have no direct observation, yet theorize about it based on data we are able to directly observe, is in this specific vein the same as Intelligent Design proponents. But you are correct, reason and logic is not exhausted. Honest materialists must say that they are interested in truth only insofar as it can be materially observed.

Here’s the bottom line - there is more scientific evidence of Earth evolution than Earth creation - especially over thousands of years and NOT 6 literal days. Where creation does come in, is how exactly the very beginning of it all got formed. So I think they should both (evolution and creation) be offered). Religions that shun evolution totally and opt for 6 literal days of creation do more harm than good imo

I would agree with this, teach both not as polar opposites but as complimentary of one another.

Gravity is a theory too. Should public schools teach that the Earth is flat since that idea doesn’t require a theory of gravity?

Creationism is not a scientific theory in any sense and therefore has no place in a science class alongside scientific stuff like evolution, which happens to be about as unreasonable or illogical as gravity is.

Interestingly enough, the Big Bang, of which we have no direct observation, yet theorize about it based on data we are able to directly observe, is in this specific vein the same as Intelligent Design proponents.

No, that’s wrong. When the “big bang” was proposed, opponents pointed out that we should be able to see the remnant radiation from that event. A few years later, some engineers for Bell Laboratories, discovered the microwave background, isotropic in all directions, at precisely the wavelength predicted.

If IDers could get that kind of confirmation for their beliefs, they would be dancing in the streets.

And they are just that: THEORIES. The Big Bang and Evolution are both THEORIES meaning, in scientific terms, they have yet to be PROVEN.

This statement reflects an unfamiliarity with the meaning of “theory” in science. In common usage, it means something like “guess.” But in science, it means an idea or group of ideas, that have been tested and verified. “Theory” is the highest level in science.

And nothing in science is proven. It’s inductive, and makes inferences from evidence.

The Big Bang and evolution are scientific theories that can be supported by evidence. Creationism is not, it is religious and I think that it should therefore the taught in Religious Studies class, not Science class.

Nope. A scientific theory can never be prooved, but it can be disprooved, it can be tested which may bring forth evidence to support it but never proove it.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.