Evolution vs. Creation being taught in schools

[BTGBullseye]

Well instead of teaching any of those two, I think it would be better to teach

them to be open for possibilities and to ask questions and/or be critical and/or to

learn about both sides of a 'story' (there are always at least two) and not to

accept anything blindly nor to defend anything ignorantly as it is so often done in

nearly all areas of science, religions and idelogies.

 

I think that would greatly increase the overall education, but alas... some would

not like the people to think instead of swallowing it all whole, wouldn't they?

 

This is exactly why I propose the subject of philosophy (Inspiring people to decide for themselves instead of being inclined) to be tought mandatory and since grade 6.

And almost the same as what I suggested. The Evolutionists are the only ones that seem to want to force a belief on us.

[Song]

Well instead of teaching any of those two, I think it would be better to teach

them to be open for possibilities and to ask questions and/or be critical and/or to

learn about both sides of a 'story' (there are always at least two) and not to

accept anything blindly nor to defend anything ignorantly as it is so often done in

nearly all areas of science, religions and idelogies.

 

I think that would greatly increase the overall education, but alas... some would

not like the people to think instead of swallowing it all whole, wouldn't they?

 

This is exactly why I propose the subject of philosophy (Inspiring people to decide for themselves instead of being inclined) to be tought mandatory and since grade 6.

And almost the same as what I suggested. The Evolutionists are the only ones that seem to want to force a belief on us.

 

Sorry, must have missed it.

Maybe I should go to bed huh...

[danielsangeo]

Evolution is a theory widely accepted by the scientific community and a fair amount of the population.

Creation is a theory accepted by a small amount of the scientific community and a significant amount of the population.

They are both theories, not facts, because there is not enough proof of either one being the real answer.

Evolution is more popular because a large amount of evidence supports it, so it seems more likely.

Creation however, has little or no evidence supporting it. so it makes intelligent design look less credible.

Once again, Evolution and Creation are both theories, not facts. So we cannot say one or the other is true or false.

I will not respond to any distasteful, slanderous or unintellectual arguments without good reason, or strong evidence to support your claims.

 

Thank you for reading this message.

 

Actually, evolution is a fact.

 

And almost the same as what I suggested. The Evolutionists are the only ones that seem to want to force a belief on us.

 

Not really. Evolution is simply a fact. The theory of evolution explains that fact.

 

I do not believe that we should tell the students that they can believe almost anything because, well, we don't do that with any other subject based upon fact, so why science? Philosophy, I get. Science, math, history, etc? No. Most certainly not. We don't let children decide if 2+2=4 or 2+2=5 (it's most assuredly the former) so why should we "let children decide" where it comes to something as elementary as evolution?

[ProHypster]

I was talking about philosophy being taught and evolution and religion as well.

 

I just wanted to stress the fact that philosophy should be taught and mandatory because a lot of the people I see lack the part when they have to think and decide themselves. They take school as a fact without questioning when it's not and I myself had to point out a lot of false things to the teacher.

 

And I got to laugh at how many times danielsangeo had to say that evolution is a fact in this thread.

[danielsangeo]

I am fine with philosophy and religion being taught in schools, but I'm a bit ambivalent on making them mandatory.

 

Critical thinking, you bet. That oughta be a mandatory class. Philosophy and religion, however, should be electives.

[ProHypster]

I am fine with philosophy and religion being taught in schools, but I'm a bit ambivalent on making them mandatory.

 

Critical thinking, you bet. That oughta be a mandatory class. Philosophy and religion, however, should be electives.

Ok sorry at my rage, I looked up what critical thinking is:

 

And it's part of philosophy, so why would you teach critical thinking and not philosophy as a whole involving types of decision making, life purpose, logic, explanation of the fields of science and religion as well as to study famous philosophers and their achievments in thinking.

[Axeldeath]

And I got to laugh at how many times danielsangeo had to say that evolution is a fact in this thread.

 

I don't think you know what a theory is yet. Evolution is a fact, the theory of evolution explains that fact, the laws of evolution are the rules that evolution follows ( e.g. a species cannot "de-evolve")

[Blue]

That is how philosophers do it as they are not inclined to any side.

"Philosophers do it without bias"

[BTGBullseye]

And I got to laugh at how many times danielsangeo had to say that evolution is a fact in this thread.

 

I don't think you know what a theory is yet. Evolution is a fact, the theory of evolution explains that fact, the laws of evolution are the rules that evolution follows ( e.g. a species cannot "de-evolve")

Theory has never equaled fact. Ever.

 

Theory is still not proven, yes that includes gravity and all other theories. Theories explain observed phenomena, not facts.

[ProHypster]

And I got to laugh at how many times danielsangeo had to say that evolution is a fact in this thread.

 

I don't think you know what a theory is yet. Evolution is a fact, the theory of evolution explains that fact, the laws of evolution are the rules that evolution follows ( e.g. a species cannot "de-evolve")

Ok, just to clear up my position, that wasn't a comment against him but for him.

Yes we all know that's a fact.

 

Oh, and by the way, fact can mean something different to everyone, I mean sure, fact is "reality" but who is it to say what reality is, to each their own.

An accepted fact is just a reality that a lot of people agree on.

A scientific fact is just reality that scientists agree on.

So yes let's not overuse this seemingly strong but in fact, An objectively weak word.

(Basically it all comes down to personal usage of the word, and noone can say otherwise, what is fact is what you are 95-100% sure of, that is all)

 

In even simpler words by saying that something is simply a fact and therefore must be true to other person is very ignorant because that is really your personal opinion. Unless you are talking about scientific fact which would merely imply the same but also that it has passed the science test of what is a fact and what is not. Then it is up to the other person to decide whether the science test is/was accurate.

 

See, that is something you learn in philosophy.

 

And now to Blue:

 

[scott pilgrim]

Is it really *that* bad in a lot of countries?

 

I go to a catholic school and they thought me everything about evolution, they don't mention religion at all unless you're doing the religion subject.

 

Even in religion we don't even learn about the bible, just ethics and other religions.

 

A lot of the science teachers are actually agnostic/atheist.

 

Maybe it's just different here..

[danielsangeo]

And I got to laugh at how many times danielsangeo had to say that evolution is a fact in this thread.

 

I don't think you know what a theory is yet. Evolution is a fact, the theory of evolution explains that fact, the laws of evolution are the rules that evolution follows ( e.g. a species cannot "de-evolve")

Theory has never equaled fact. Ever.

 

Right. "Theory" is an EXPLANATION of facts. So, you have the theory of evolution and the fact of evolution. The theory of evolution explains the fact of evolution.

 

Theory is still not proven, yes that includes gravity and all other theories. Theories explain observed phenomena, not facts.

 

Yet, there is a FACT of evolution. Nothing is "proven" in science. But there are facts, like gravity, germs, and evolution.

[Doom Shepherd]

Yet, there is a FACT of evolution. Nothing is "proven" in science. But there are facts, like gravity, germs, and evolution.

 

Yep. Evolution and Gravitation are BOTH theories that explain OBSERVED FACTS. They are ENTIRELY equal in validity...

 

Yet for some reason I never see the same people who claim that their guesses are right because "evolution is just a theory" going skydiving without parachutes because Gravitation is "just a theory" too.

 

Come on, guys, where's your support for the opposing "Red Bull Gives You Wings" theory? Get up in that plane and JUMP!!! You can FLY! Only SCIENTISTS and ATHEISTS believe in GRAVITY!!!

[BTGBullseye]

The gravitational effect observed is a fact, but what causes it is the theory.

 

There is no part of Evolution that is fact except for adaptation, and similar looking creatures/DNA.

[danielsangeo]

The gravitational effect observed is a fact, but what causes it is the theory.

 

There is no part of Evolution that is fact except for adaptation, and similar looking creatures/DNA.

 

What do you think is the difference between evolution and adaptation?

[Song]

What do you think is the difference between evolution and adaptation?

 

I'm not entirely sure but evolution is genetical adaption while adaption itself could

be done by... everything?

Edited June 26, 2011 by Guest (see edit history)

[BTGBullseye]

What do you think is the difference between evolution and adaptation?

Evolution changes the species, adaptation changes the individual.

[danielsangeo]

What do you think is the difference between evolution and adaptation?

Evolution changes the species, adaptation changes the individual.

 

If that's the case, then evolution (change of species) has been observed.

[Doom Shepherd]

Works like this:

 

1. One individual mutates.

2. This mutation enables the individual to better survive than its fellows. (That is adaptation, and that is where adaptation ends.)

3. That individual, by virtue of its greater success, can now more effectively mate with other individuals, and pass on its improved mutation.

4. The mutation allows that individual's offspring to outproduce other members of its species by virtue of the same success

5 Repeat steps 3-4 as needed.

6. Eventually, the adaptation is incorporated into the genetic code of an entire population of the species. (Not necessarily throughout the entire species, which is why the species tree has branches)

7. One new individual mutates.

8. Repeat items 2-6 until speciation occurs.

 

Items 3 through 7 are Evolution. And the entire process has been witnessed and verified both in the lab and in nature.

 

Dismissing this fact is like saying that you believe in the existence of the number 1, but you can't see how that can lead people to conclude that the other numbers exist.

 

Change is cumulative. Evolution is cumulative adaptation. It's as simple as 1+1... +1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+... etc.

[BTGBullseye]

But you have not proven that given the same circumstances for both sub-species, that they wouldn't return to the same species...

 

Until that is done, it is still adaptation... (every animal/person on the planet adapts to their surroundings, and 99% of the population adapts similarly when provided the same environment)