Creationism in schools?

[Me Myself]

Since no one has defined "creationism", each person interprets what it is according to their experience and education.

What is a creationist class gong to be about in your head?

"Hi class, today we are speaking about where life on Earth comes from. God/s did it! Okay, begone my class now and go to the science one. I gotta go have sex with the math teacher"

 

[rusra02]

What is a creationist class gong to be about in your head?

"Hi class, today we are speaking about where life on Earth comes from. God/s did it! Okay, begone my class now and go to the science one. I gotta go have sex with the math teacher"

Your flippant and offensive remarks are typical of postings by ToE supporters.
One could start with the fact that evolution isn't the foregone conclusion that ToE supporters would like us to think it is: The Johannesburg newspaper "The Star" (4/20/1982 p.19) contained this quote" "A century after Darwin's death, we still have not the slightest demonstrable or even plausible idea of how evolution really took place-and in recent yers this has led to an extraordinary series of battles over the whole question... A state of almost open war exists among the evolutionists themselves, with every kind of sect urging some new modification." (quote from rs p.122)
Presenting the ToE as unassailable fact is both dishonest and nothing less than propaganda foisted on young minds.

 

[Noaidi]

One could start with the fact that evolution isn't the foregone conclusion that ToE supporters would like us to think it is.....

Let's NOT start with that. The question was what would you teach. Forget evolution. What would a creationist lesson in a science class actually involve? What textbooks would you you use? What experiments would you use or discuss to support the hypothesis?

All too often, when asked about the creationist content of a lesson, the focus is on what evolution supposedly can't explain. As I say, remove evolution from the lesson and focus on what you would teach to support your idea.

 

[otokage007]

What is a creationist class gong to be about in your head?

"Hi class, today we are speaking about where life on Earth comes from. God/s did it! Okay, begone my class now and go to the science one. I gotta go have sex with the math teacher"

:biglaugh:
That would rock

 

[rusra02]

Let's NOT start with that. The question was what would you teach. Forget evolution. What would a creationist lesson in a science class actually involve? What textbooks would you you use? What experiments would you use or discuss to support the hypothesis?

All too often, when asked about the creationist content of a lesson, the focus is on what evolution supposedly can't explain. As I say, remove evolution from the lesson and focus on what you would teach to support your idea.

Some scientists believe in evolution. Other scientists believe that living things give evidence of intelligent design. A "fair and balanced" review of the evidence for (and against) both sides of this issue would seem to be a starting point for a science class. However, I am not advocating for changes to educational curriculum. Rather, I am sharing my beliefs that evolutionists are trying to push their agenda upon the classrooms and woe betide any scientist or teacher who fails to toe the evolution line.

 

[Noaidi]

Some scientists believe in evolution. Other scientists believe that living things give evidence of intelligent design. A "fair and balanced" review of the evidence for (and against) both sides of this issue would seem to be a starting point for a science class. However, I am not advocating for changes to educational curriculum. Rather, I am sharing my beliefs that evolutionists are trying to push their agenda upon the classrooms and woe betide any scientist or teacher who fails to toe the evolution line.

Can you provide some of the evidence for ID that would be appropriate for a science lesson?

 

[Draka]

Some scientists believe in evolution. Other scientists believe that living things give evidence of intelligent design. A "fair and balanced" review of the evidence for (and against) both sides of this issue would seem to be a starting point for a science class. However, I am not advocating for changes to educational curriculum. Rather, I am sharing my beliefs that evolutionists are trying to push their agenda upon the classrooms and woe betide any scientist or teacher who fails to toe the evolution line.

Just what do you think "both sides" are? There aren't two sides to the actual evidence. You still don't answer the question though. Really, just what does the "other side" consist of? What would be taught? Leaving out anything about how "evolution is wrong", what would anyone be teaching and what would be the material to substantiate it?

 

[jarofthoughts]

I found the question of a creationism/ID lesson plan to be so interesting that I decided to make a new thread about it.

Here it is; http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...lessons-about-creationism-id.html#post3109170

Go take a look!

 

[Falvlun]

I found the question of a creationism/ID lesson plan to be so interesting that I decided to make a new thread about it.

Here it is; http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...lessons-about-creationism-id.html#post3109170

Go take a look!

In my highschool textbook (disclaimer: I was homeschooled), they literally had a picture of a slimy mud man emerging from a sea of ooze, contrasted with a shining human specimen clothed in a robe of white, with the question: Which would you have preferred to come from?

So, apparently, a creationist lesson basically is just about aesthetic preferences. If you like white robes and cleanliness, then by golly, that proves that creationism is true!

 

[jarofthoughts]

In my highschool textbook (disclaimer: I was homeschooled), they literally had a picture of a slimy mud man emerging from a sea of ooze, contrasted with a shining human specimen clothed in a robe of white, with the question: Which would you have preferred to come from?

So, apparently, a creationist lesson basically is just about aesthetic preferences. If you like white robes and cleanliness, then by golly, that proves that creationism is true!

Right.
I think I'm going to need a bit more than that...

 

[Me Myself]

Your flippant and offensive remarks are typical of postings by ToE supporters.
One could start with the fact that evolution isn't the foregone conclusion that ToE supporters would like us to think it is: The Johannesburg newspaper "The Star" (4/20/1982 p.19) contained this quote" "A century after Darwin's death, we still have not the slightest demonstrable or even plausible idea of how evolution really took place-and in recent yers this has led to an extraordinary series of battles over the whole question... A state of almost open war exists among the evolutionists themselves, with every kind of sect urging some new modification." (quote from rs p.122)

What I love about that is that you are still teaching evolution. Which I am totally fine and dandy with. Evolution is certain, it´s details are up on continual debate.

But I asked: what would a "creationist" or "intelligent design" class talk about?

 

[tempter]

'Science Guy' Bill Nye condemns teaching creationism - Technology & Science - CBC News

I noticed in this article it mentions States where it's considered acceptable to teach creationism. If a teacher started spouting that stuff to my kid I'd lose it. Do you think this is appropriate?

PS Don't you wish you were as cool as Bill Nye?

Teaching creationism or ID is fine in a private or christian school. In a public school? Not at all

 

[jarofthoughts]

Teaching creationism or ID is fine in a private or christian school.

I thought the point of having a school was to educate people and not to lie to them... :sarcastic

 

[tempter]

I thought the point of having a school was to educate people and not to lie to them... :sarcastic

Depends on the school I suppose. Some like to lie to people no matter what or where they are. Christianity is large simply because the lies are believable by many.
My kids will never attend any religious based school while they're a minor.

 

[rusra02]

Just what do you think "both sides" are? There aren't two sides to the actual evidence. You still don't answer the question though. Really, just what does the "other side" consist of? What would be taught? Leaving out anything about how "evolution is wrong", what would anyone be teaching and what would be the material to substantiate it?

You do realize reputable scientists are presenting Intelligent Design as an opposing theory to evolution, and have written books about ID?
I think this quote is appropriate:

​

g87 1/22 p. 25“An Associated Press-NBC News poll discovered that 76% of Americans believe that both the theories of evolution and creation ought to be taught in public schools. Only 8% wanted the evolution theory alone and only 10% wanted just the creation theory taught. Six per cent were unsure. . . .
“The central argument against teaching the creation theory in public schools is that it is religion masquerading as science. But according to Dr. Carl Sagan, evolution is a religion which masquerades as science. . . .
“No theory, whether scientific or political, can be sustained if a wall must be built to keep adherents in and opponents out. If the bondage which flows from a flawed political ideology like communism can be denounced, should not the wall surrounding the citadel of evolution be torn down and the opponents allowed to do battle on an equal basis? . . .
“Evolutionists don’t want to fight. They have already declared victory and view any assault on their domain as pretension. Could it be that the reason they want to avoid a fight is because they evolved from chickens?”—Cal Thomas’ column in the New York Daily News, Friday, August 22, 1986.​

 

[rusra02]

What I love about that is that you are still teaching evolution. Which I am totally fine and dandy with. Evolution is certain, it´s details are up on continual debate.

But I asked: what would a "creationist" or "intelligent design" class talk about?

I doubt most evolutionists would be "fine and dandy with" a fair and honest discussion about the weaknesses of the ToE, the lack of evidence for evolution, and the scientific dissent against the theory.
For example, "On September 30, 1986, The New York Times published an article by a New York University professor, Irving Kristol. His contention is that if evolution were taught in the public schools as the theory it is rather than as the fact it isn’t, there would not be the controversy that now rages between evolution and creationism. Kristol stated: “There is also little doubt that it is this pseudoscientific dogmatism that has provoked the current religious reaction.”

“Though this theory is usually taught as an established scientific truth,” Kristol said, “it is nothing of the sort. It has too many lacunae [gaps]. Geological evidence does not provide us with the spectrum of intermediate species we would expect. Moreover, laboratory experiments reveal how close to impossible it is for one species to evolve into another, even allowing for selective breeding and some genetic mutation. . . . The gradual transformation of the population of one species into another is a biological hypothesis, not a biological fact.” (quote from g87 7/22 )​

 

[jarofthoughts]

Except, rusra02, you did not, in fact, answer the question.
I've made a thread in which the question is slightly rephrased in order to address it more coherently, and I hope you will take the time to tell us what would be taught in a class about creationism.

Here is the thread: http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...lessons-about-creationism-id.html#post3109170

Make sure you read the OP before you reply.

 

[Noaidi]

Again, rusra, you are focusing on evolution. Why do you insist on deflecting the question? Could it be because creationism, without the buttressing plank of "evolution can't explain....", doesn't actually have any substance of its own that would merit a science lesson?
If this is the case, please say so. If you think that creationism is a valid topic for the science class, then - please - tell us what you think should be taught.

 

[rusra02]

Again, rusra, you are focusing on evolution. Why do you insist on deflecting the question? Could it be because creationism, without the buttressing plank of "evolution can't explain....", doesn't actually have any substance of its own that would merit a science lesson?
If this is the case, please say so. If you think that creationism is a valid topic for the science class, then - please - tell us what you think should be taught.

I am not deflecting the question. I answered the question but you apparently did not read it or did not like the answer. I repost it here for your convenience:

"Some scientists believe in evolution. Other scientists believe that living things give evidence of intelligent design. A "fair and balanced" review of the evidence for (and against) both sides of this issue would seem to be a starting point for a science class. However, I am not advocating for changes to educational curriculum. Rather, I am sharing my beliefs that evolutionists are trying to push their agenda upon the classrooms and woe betide any scientist or teacher who fails to toe the evolution line."

 

[jarofthoughts]

I am not deflecting the question. I answered the question but you apparently did not read it or did not like the answer. I repost it here for your convenience:

"Some scientists believe in evolution. Other scientists believe that living things give evidence of intelligent design. A "fair and balanced" review of the evidence for (and against) both sides of this issue would seem to be a starting point for a science class. However, I am not advocating for changes to educational curriculum. Rather, I am sharing my beliefs that evolutionists are trying to push their agenda upon the classrooms and woe betide any scientist or teacher who fails to toe the evolution line."

So you would keep the curriculum just as it is, with no mention of creationism or ID, and with the current level of education regarding the Theory of Evolution.
So...
What are you creationists whining about then if you don't want to change anything?

Oh, and just for the record; there is no 'evolutionist agenda'.
Whatever would be the purpose of that?
Also; scientists follow the evidence, which overwhelmingly supports ToE, and as for us teachers, we don't get to determine the curriculum.
As a teacher I have to follow the curriculum of the schoolsystem that the department of education has put in place.
I do have some say in how I teach it, but the main content is decided by someone else.

Just an FYI.