Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Cat

Creationism in Private Schools

227 posts in this topic

So is the Big Bang proven, or for that matter even provable?

If not, then should it be taught in science classes?

Proven? Depends who you ask I suppose but I am not a physicist so this is not my area. Probable? Hell yes. There are mountains of evidence of the Big Bang, from Hubble's law to primordial gas clouds to accurate age estimates from a variety of sources. There are many, many lines of evidence of the Big Bang. Scientific theories, however, are not immutable - that's the brilliance of science. That doesn't mean they are speculative. They're not. They are the best possible explanation we have right now based on our accumulated evidence, and have received rigorous testing and experimentation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Riiight.

As I recall, Piltdown Man was presented as proof of evolution in the Scopes Trial before it was discredited.

You're lumping human evolution with evolution.

Evolution exists... Maybe there isn't so much evidence with the human species right now, but there is plenty of supporting evidence elsewhere.

No matter how much you do this:

noise-fingers-in-ears-001.jpg

...it doesn't change the fact that species adapt and evolve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're lumping human evolution with evolution.

Evolution exists... Maybe there isn't so much evidence with the human species right now, but there is plenty of supporting evidence elsewhere.

No matter how much you do this:

noise-fingers-in-ears-001.jpg

...it doesn't change the fact that species adapt and evolve.

And no matter how much you do that, it doesn't disprove the existence or validity of alternate theories and interpretations.

Feel free to keep trying though.

Proven? Depends who you ask I suppose. Probable? Hell yes. There are mountains of evidence of the Big Bang, from Hubble's law to primordial gas clouds to accurate age estimates from a variety of sources. There are many, many lines of evidence of the Big Bang. Scientific theories, however, are not immutable - that's the brilliance of science. That doesn't mean they are speculative. They're not. They are the best possible explanation we have right now based on our accumulated evidence.

Again though, those things are open to interpretation.

Bottom line for me: I'm not up for public schools teaching religion, but they also shouldn't discount, deny or suppress it.

Acknowledge the other theories (call them 'alternate explanations' if you prefer) and I'm happy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...but then I get to play the "show me your evidence" card, if I wanted to play devil's advocate...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...but then I get to play the "show me your evidence" card, if I wanted to play devil's advocate...

Like I said previously, look it up. Not that any of it's going to matter.

This whole debate is pretty much a colossal waste of time. Nobody's going to change their mind.

That's why I generally don't bother with the Tinderbox. All that generally happens is a lot of back and forth that goes nowhere and gets boring (and a lot of time gets wasted).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And no matter how much you do that, it doesn't disprove the existence or validity of alternate theories and interpretations.

Feel free to keep trying though.

Again though, those things are open to interpretation.

Bottom line for me: I'm not up for public schools teaching religion, but they also shouldn't discount, deny or suppress it.

Acknowledge the other theories (call them 'alternate explanations' if you prefer) and I'm happy.

What things are open to interpretation? Please be specific. The general terms that students learn about evolution, the big bang, etc in high school are really not going to be overturned at this point. There's just too much evidence in favor of them. The likelihood is extremely small, and by virtue of the teaching of the scientific method they receive, they hopefully understand the method by which some of these conclusions have been drawn and also understand the process.

On the other hand, SPECIFIC examples may change, may come about, etc... but ultimately the more research we do, the more we find support for scientific theories, not alternative explanations.

Science classes already end up acknowledging that there are religious beliefs in the arena of how life got started etc, but what most creationism advocates want is something MUCH MORE than what you are suggesting, you do realize that, right?

Like I said previously, look it up. Not that any of it's going to matter.

This whole debate is pretty much a colossal waste of time. Nobody's going to change their mind.

I have tried looking it up and I have found no alternative interpretations for evolution that have any modern scientific backing. Please, if you have some, please share, or at least offer some sort of example even roughly in what we should be looking for.

Else we end up with bullshit like the OP - Dinosaurs exist, evolution is fake!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What things are open to interpretation? Please be specific. The general terms that students learn about evolution, the big bang, etc in high school are really not going to be overturned at this point. There's just too much evidence in favor of them. The likelihood is extremely small.

On the other hand, SPECIFIC examples may change, may come about, etc... but ultimately the more research we do, the more we find support for scientific theories, not alternative explanations.

Science classes already end up acknowledging that there are religious beliefs in the arena of how life got started etc, but what most creationism advocates want is something MUCH MORE than what you are suggesting, you do realize that, right?

I'm only defending my particular idea. I said elsewhere that I can't speak for others.

But in the same vein, you do realize there are quite a few people out there who want any and all references to any religious ideas completely eradicated, ignored or ridiculed in the educational arena, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have tried looking it up and I have found no alternative interpretations for evolution that have any modern scientific backing. Please, if you have some, please share, or at least offer some sort of example even roughly in what we should be looking for.

If I took the time to do so, would you accept any of them as legit?

(be honest)

That's why this sort of thing is a waste of time.

I jumped into the debate because I had a wild hair. Now I remember why I generally don't bother with this forum. It's a lot of typing for essentially nothing accomplished on either side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm only defending my particular idea. I said elsewhere that I can't speak for others.

But in the same vein, you do realize there are quite a few people out there who want any and all references to any religious ideas completely eradicated, ignored or ridiculed in the educational arena, right?

Ridiculed is different than ignored. There are some undoubtedly who want them ridiculed but they are in the vast minority. Most simply want specific religious ideas ignored in science classes, or public school not specifically dedicated to religious discussions/topics. I don't think beliefs should be ridiculed in school but they also should be generally avoided, and science classes are absolutely not the place for religious belief systems.

It seems to me you are basically advocating what is already the case, mixed in with some lack of understanding apparently due to miseducation by some people in the past relating to the strength of evidence RE: creationism & ID.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quit calling creationism a theory. It isn't a theory. It does not have a single shred of evidence. People do believe it. So fuging what? Why should science teachers explain that some people believe in NON-scientific things in a SCIENCE class? You keep saying theory, Scot, and I don't think that word means what you think it means. Theory in science =/= layman's theory. If there were alternatives, those would be discussed. As it is, there aren't any, and there DAMN sure isn't one in creationism.

Why not tell kids in history class that some people believe the holocaust never happened? Why not tell kids that some people believe that blue is actually green and that yellow is actually red? Because that is exactly what you are positing with "why not say that some people don't believe it and believe in myths?" type of statements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites