Teach me the science of creatonism without mentioning evolution.

[Monk Of Reason]

The only way I've heard people "teach" creationism is by arguing against evolution.

I'm sure the point of this thread was to prove that Creationism is not science and the only talking point they have is "evolution is wrong" as if creationism was somehow the default were evolution found faulty. This idea is flawed at its core in that even if they did disprove evolution (didn't and won't) then creationsm still shouldn't be taught in schools because it still isn't science.

 

[Me Myself]

No, but the definition of evolution has been dumbed down so much, as in the video, when we go to the bathroom that is evolution. Anything is evolution anymore. So how can a creationist talk about creation when everything is considered evolution?

relax, as long as you are not talking about "macro evolution" like in the way life changes it`s form fromone species to the next, then you would be fulfilling the request.

It`s simple.

Talk about creationism`s scientific evidence and it`s falsifiability without talking about macro evolution.

 

[rusra02]

As the title says.

Teach me what would a creatonism class would consist of without mentioning evolution.

Include the evidence for a creator and the falsifiability of your claims.

Go!

I would suggest two things:

1. Since evolution is taught as the explanation for all life, teaching the truth about ID (not creationism) without mentioning this theory would be difficult.
2. Such curriculum do exist. I take no position on the content of such, since I haven't read it. Just Google it if interested.

 

[Alceste]

I would suggest two things:

1. Since evolution is taught as the explanation for all life, teaching the truth about ID (not creationism) without mentioning this theory would be difficult.
2. Such curriculum do exist. I take no position on the content of such, since I haven't read it. Just Google it if interested.

He's asking you to imagine you don't have to compete with evolution. It's a creationism-only science class. How do you teach it? What is a creationist's hypothesis for how life was formed and what evidence would the class be looking at? What field trips would they have? Which creationist researcher would they be reading about? Most importantly for a science class, what hands-on, simple experiment can they replicate in the lab to help them understand the mechanisms of special creation?

 

[Me Myself]

I would suggest two things:

1. Since evolution is taught as the explanation for all life

It`s not. It`s taught as the explanation for species, but we dont know how life originated yet.

Can creationism show it`s scientific evidence for the origin? and provide the means of falsifiability?

 

[Me Myself]

2. Such curriculum do exist. I take no position on the content of such, since I haven't read it. Just Google it if interested.

Creation Curriculum LLC

That`s what I found, it doesn`t look good and it mentions the word "biblical" and "evolution"

 

[tumbleweed41]

I see a lot o whining about evolution, and claims that Creationism is not understood, but no basis for teaching Creationism/ID as a scientific theory.

 

[rusra02]

Creation Curriculum LLC

That`s what I found, it doesn`t look good and it mentions the word "biblical" and "evolution"

Just Google "intelligent design curriculum"

 

[Falvlun]

Besides saying "We believe that some God did all this", I don't see what else could be said in a class designated solely to intelligent design.

 

[Me Myself]

Just Google "intelligent design curriculum"

I find books, not an actual curriculum.

 

[Skwim]

Creation Curriculum LLC

That`s what I found, it doesn`t look good and it mentions the word "biblical" and "evolution"

Re. Unraveling the Origins Controversy by David A. DeWitt, the book featured on the linked site, and, as it turns out, the only textbook used in Liberty University's "History of Life" course.

COURSE DESCRIPTION
An interdisciplinary study of the origin and history of life in the universe.
Faculty of the Center for Creation Studies will draw from science, religion, history, and philosophy in presenting the
evidence and arguments for creation and against evolution.
This course is required for all Liberty students.
source
​

Here's a review of the book

“David DeWitt clearly elucidates the differences between empirical science and historical or forensic-science and exposes how evolutionists blur these distinctions to bolster their claims. He defines the assumptions used by both evolutionists and creationists and explains how these presuppositions impact the interpretation of the data. Unraveling the Origins Controversy definitely lives up to its name.”

L. Daniel Howell , Ph.D., Scientist

​

So again, they just can't make a case for themselves with attacking evolution. Nothing new, just keeping true to form.

 

[Ouroboros]

Creation allows for change, and change is, according to science, evolution, so the OP has given an impossible task and shows a lack of understanding of creation.

I think the idea of the OP was to show that Creationism isn't a science since there's no way to teach Creationism as a science in a science class. In other words, when you say it's "an impossible task" it confirms the OPs implicit claim.

Here's how a Creationism "Science" class could look like: open the Bible to book x, chapter y, verse z. Read the verse. Pray. Ask God what it means. Ergo God. Class dismissed. Repeat for a whole semester.

 

[Skwim]

I would suggest two things:

1. Since evolution is taught as the explanation for all life, teaching the truth about ID (not creationism) without mentioning this theory would be difficult.

Absolutely, because creationism has no scientific underpinnings. And please note that courses in evolution don't mention creationism, and with good reason: it ain't relevant.

BTW, ID = creationism = ID. If you go back to the history of ID you'll find that it arose as an end run around the prohibition of teaching creationism in public schools. See Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District

The following is from that case.

On December 20, 2005, the US District Court ruled that intelligent design is not science and is essentially religious in nature and the board's requirement endorsing intelligent design as an alternative to evolution in science classes unconstitutional on the grounds that its inclusion violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
The judge in the Dover trial specifically referred to Pandas in his decision, stating:
​

“ As Plaintiffs meticulously and effectively presented to the Court, Pandas went through many drafts, several of which were completed prior to and some after the Supreme Court's decision in Edwards, which held that the Constitution forbids teaching creationism as science. By comparing the pre and post Edwards drafts of Pandas, three astonishing points emerge: (1) the definition for creation science in early drafts is identical to the definition of ID; (2) cognates of the word creation (creationism and creationist), which appeared approximately 150 times, were deliberately and systematically replaced with the phrase ID; and (3) the changes occurred shortly after the Supreme Court held that creation science is religious and cannot be taught in public school science classes in Edwards. This word substitution is telling, significant, and reveals that a purposeful change of words was effected without any corresponding change in content .... The weight of the evidence clearly demonstrates, as noted, that the systemic change from “creation” to “intelligent design” occurred sometime in 1987, after the Supreme Court’s important Edwards decision.
source
​

 

[Agnostic75]

Evolution exists because it is anything the evolutionist wants it to be. The theory of creation is already out there for people to see. I'm surprised how many people know nothing about it, but argue against it.

But you know very little about biology. If you do, then please critique Ken Miller's article on the flagellum, and irreducible complexity at The Flagellum Unspun. And, please be thorough. That way, you can show people how much you know about biology.

Months ago, you claimed that laymen can adequately evaluate evolution, but surely many cannot. That would be quite easy to test. Surely many people who have low IQs, and never made better than a C in high school, and failed biology, are not able to adequately evaluate evolution.

Most creationist laymen start out by accepting a literal interpretation of the story of Adam and Eve, and then try to force science to agree with their religious beliefs.

Do you accept the global flood theory, or the young earth theory? A good number of creationist experts accept one or both of those theories.

 

[Me Myself]

Thatcomment made me think on this:

 

[Ouroboros]

No, but the definition of evolution has been dumbed down so much, as in the video, when we go to the bathroom that is evolution. Anything is evolution anymore. So how can a creationist talk about creation when everything is considered evolution?

Well, then that's a problem of Creationism then. If Creationism can't stand on its own legs without the "false" evolution, then it simply can't stand. Logic. "Can't" = "Can't". If Creationism requires the science of evolution, then evolution must exist first. You can't establish a science based only the assumed falsehood of another science. It's like saying that antigravity science is proper and true because we can't explain quantum gravity. Gravity does exist. Gravity is true. Quantum gravity can't be explained yet (or maybe ever). Doesn't mean antigravity is a proper science.

 

[Ouroboros]

Evolution exists because it is anything the evolutionist wants it to be.

That's very arrogant and ignorant. It's because of these kinds of statements and claims that most "evolutionists" just give up trying to explain science.

The theory of creation is already out there for people to see.

There is no "theory of creation" out there. There is a hypothesis about creation, but not a theory. And there are several hundreds hypotheses of creation, each one from each and every religion, some even have multiple. So which religious creationism is the correct one? Yours? Why yours? Why not his or hers or that one, and other than yours?

I'm surprised how many people know nothing about it, but argue against it.

I'm surprised how many people know nothing about evolution, yet constantly argue against it.

Here's my pet peeve about "God vs Evolution" debate. No believer can say as a fact that God didn't use Evolution as means to create. Evolution is obvious and there's so much material to pull from to see research that shows evolution to be true. Who are you or I to say that God didn't use Evolution? Why can't God use Evolution to create life? Why protest against the facts of reality only sustain some fickle dream of fantasy, holding on to beliefs that can't be proven, and deny the evidence for the majesty and miracle of life in this universe the way nature tells us? Why can't Nature be True and God use Nature to make life? Why not? It's a silly and ridiculous idea that God is limited to only "special creation" and not Evolution. Evolution is true. If God is true, then God used Evolution.

 

[Sculelos]

As the title says.

Teach me what would a creatonism class would consist of without mentioning evolution.

Include the evidence for a creator and the falsifiability of your claims.

Go!

You have asked me an easy question.

Creation consist of 7 parts.

1. The Creation of Time and Space (Nitrogen)
2. The space was empty without energy.
3. God put energy into it and there was energy in it. (Mankind was the Energy form)
4. God called the energy day and the opposite night.
5. And God created Earth in between the Oceans and Outer-space.
6. God created Oxygen and Hydrogen to form Water and Oxygen to separate the Waters underneath the Sea floor from the Waters above the Earth (Outer space)
7. And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.
8. And God created plants on the Earth which is on and under the dry land.
9. And God created lights in the Solid parts of Heaven which is what we call planets or stars.
10. Two great lights were formed, the Sun and the Moon.
11. And God set them both in motion in the Solid parts of Heaven.
12.

And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.

21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.

13.

24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.

25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

Remember God created Man but Mankind was destined 6 parts of 986 years, Remember the Lord first created the Heavens and the Earth and all that is in it and then he Rested or Watched it unfold and Each day to God is like 986 years to us and we are currently in the 5801 Year since Creation.

So indeed God is not finished with his creation since mankind has yet to reach the final part and that is the achievement to be created in the image of God.

This Part is not finished yet but will be finished in less then 115 years from now.

26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

You said 7 parts and listed 13...

 

[Sculelos]

You said 7 parts and listed 13...

Yes, yes I actually never mentioned the parts in order, This is the condensed version.

1. Time and Space are created.
2. The Heavens and Earth are created.
3. Mankind is created as an energy form.
4. Mankind shifts into all energy forms and taste them all.
5. Satan tricks mankind into trapping the energy forms into Solid Earth.
6. Mankind is Judged to toil and labor and be trapped and bound with Flesh and Blood bodies of Bone and Skin and Satan is trapped under the Earth and Above the Earth in two different parts.
7. God Rest 1 day and watches it repeat itself backward this is the timeline we watch and experience as humans.

After this Week of 5916 years is over (we are in year 5801) those of us who chose to embrace and understand both the light and darkness of energy and had the power to overcome it will be made in the "Image of God" were we will live forever and reproduce throughout fraternity in an infinite World space.

This is the essence of creation.