toldailytopic: Should creation be taught in public school?

[warren clark]

No.
Separation of church and state was mandated in the constitution by our forefathers.
There is no established religion. Creationism being taught in schools would be a violation of the constitution.

 

[Persephone66]

Sure and while we are at it, children should be taught that lightning is caused by Zeus chucking lightning bolts at the Earth.

Teach the controversy, right?

Keep it in a class on mythology and out of the science class.

 

[warren clark]

I think if I look hard enough, I can find where you and others that agree with you say "creationism", indicating it is a belief system. By the way, you are wrong. This was a Christian nation founded by Christians. Like John Adams in granites sig.

Where does it say this is a Christian Nation?

Infact in the constitution it boldly says that this country does not have an established religion.

"The civil rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner, or on any pretext, infringed."

 

[warren clark]

These are not theories, beanie brain. Big difference between observable phenomena and a theory. Nobody ever observed an ape evolving into a man. That's just a theory. Before you cry foul, you walked right into that one mixing theories with observable phenomena.

I am of the opinion that they should yank evolution from the schools. It's idiot theory, turning out a bunch of nitwits thinking they are part ape. Kids are starting to act like apes. There's certainly no ape in my family tree.

PS hate to burst your bubble but Gravity is a "Theory".
Its a humble gesture by scientists when they can admit they don't fully understand the universe and it leaves room for correction.

"Evolution is only a theory" - Richard Dawkins

 

[warren clark]

It takes more faith to believe that universe was an accident and you evolved from an ape, than does to believe that universe was created by God. There is mounting evidence that Man did not come from apes. I have several volumes in my library that discuss this very issue. One of the hard issues that challenge the theories around Man 'evolution' is that fully human fossils are being found buried deeper than supposed ape ancestors. In one cave they had that the 'ape men' had been hunted by humans that the humans had the apes for supper.

I am not convinced that we are an accident and the descendant of an ape.

You watch too much Bill O'Reilly. K:
-- Bill O'Reilly and Dawkins --

 

[voltaire]

I don't dispute evolution. It's obvious animals change over time. What is not a theory like gravity is the speculation called common descent from one ancestor. That is what should not be taught in public schools. It is a huge leap in logic to claim that just because some birds turned into penguins and some reptiles turned into snakes and some even toed ungulates turned into whales that all animals came from a simple bacteria. It is actually infantile thinking to draw such a conclusion.

 

[Yazichestvo]

I don't dispute evolution. It's obvious animals change over time. What is not a theory like gravity is the speculation called common descent from one ancestor. That is what should not be taught in public schools. It is a huge leap in logic to claim that just because some birds turned into penguins and some reptiles turned into snakes and some even toed ungulates turned into whales that all animals came from a simple bacteria. It is actually infantile thinking to draw such a conclusion.

I can see how they might be separate arguments, I'll admit that, but once you conclude that different types of animals evolved from a common ancestor, it makes sense for any researcher to see how far this common descent can be traced. It's not that we should immediately assume common descent, but we should at least look for signs of it.

 

[crossnote]

Earlier in U.S. history that (creation account) was the standard fair in the schools.
Enter Scopes, and now it's placed somewhere below mythology...too bad...for us.

 

[Alate_One]

I don't dispute evolution. It's obvious animals change over time. What is not a theory like gravity is the speculation called common descent from one ancestor. That is what should not be taught in public schools. It is a huge leap in logic to claim that just because some birds turned into penguins and some reptiles turned into snakes and some even toed ungulates turned into whales that all animals came from a simple bacteria. It is actually infantile thinking to draw such a conclusion.

I think you're misinterpreting the idea of common descent. The viewpoint isn't that all life came from "a single bacterium". There was likely a lot of gene sharing in those early life forms (none were what we would actually call "bacteria), so you're probably looking at a pool of organisms. Indeed eukaryotic organisms are a combination of two different cells or even three or four in the case of plants and a number of protists (there is very strong evidence for this).

But there are reasons for thinking common descent from either a single or small pool of organisms is likely, the most obvious of this is the universal genetic code. We can also look at the fossil record and see only very simple, colonial organisms and then the appearance of clearly multicellular organisms and then a flowering of diversity in multicellular life.

If you look at TOLweb (tree of life) navigational image, you'll note the base of the tree isn't a single trunk, but many.

 

[Yorzhik]

No. Neither creationism, nor any other subject should be taught in public school. Unless all public moneys are removed as support for government schools.

 

[Nick M]

By posting pictures of fossils? (that is typically what gets me a neg rep from you) Apparently you think creation itself testifies against God. You are a very confused man.

If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.

Romans 10:9

And I know you don't believe by your testimony. God said "six days". It is over. All you have to do is figure out how he did it in six days. Instead, you testify against his Word. You are lost, and frankly, I don't care.


21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22 Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’

 

[rocketman]

The TheologyOnline.com TOPIC OF THE DAY for May 10th, 2011 09:42 AM

toldailytopic: Should creation be taught in public school?

Absolutely, it could be no more subjective than evolution to introduce in a classroom environment. Both sides of the argument should be presented and given equal time. Let the students deduce their own opinions.

 

[DavisBJ]

Absolutely, it could be no more subjective than evolution to introduce in a classroom environment. Both sides of the argument should be presented and given equal time. Let the students deduce their own opinions.

I agree. And the same thing for alchemy as an alternative to chemistry, and astrology as an alternative to astronomy, and levitation as an alternative to aerodynamics, and phrenology as a measure of intelligence. Don’t rely on scientists for their views on this. After all, who would be the most likely to make an accurate determination on these things, those silly scientists who publish thousands of papers on the subjects of evolution and astrophysics and chemistry, or high school students who have just barely figured out how to drive a car?

 

[Nick M]

No she doesn't. She just doesn't blindly adhere to a fundamentalist interpretation of what Gods word says Nick.

If what comes out of you 'defiles you' then you might wanna start looking in the mirror dude. Captain mature you ain't....

lain:

A sharp rebuke is the correct path to perverts like your self, retard77. He denies the Word before men, I know where its heart is. And alate one is a raging moron that cheated through school. And gave the heathen proffessors the answers they wanted to shake their fist at God. AO is one of the worst people here, as you are also.

 

[keypurr]

The TheologyOnline.com TOPIC OF THE DAY for May 10th, 2011 09:42 AM

toldailytopic: Should creation be taught in public school?

Take the topic above and run with it! Slice it, dice it, give us your general thoughts about it. Everyday there will be a new TOL Topic of the Day.
If you want to make suggestions for the Topic of the Day send a Tweet to @toldailytopic or @theologyonline or send it to us via Facebook.

YES

 

[rocketman]

I agree. And the same thing for alchemy as an alternative to chemistry, and astrology as an alternative to astronomy, and levitation as an alternative to aerodynamics, and phrenology as a measure of intelligence. Don’t rely on scientists for their views on this. After all, who would be the most likely to make an accurate determination on these things, those silly scientists who publish thousands of papers on the subjects of evolution and astrophysics and chemistry, or high school students who have just barely figured out how to drive a car?

You present your sarcasm as if you are a true believer in the fallacy of evolution. Don't waste your breath, or fingers if you will, backing up your supposition, I and others have heard it before. Evolution is a subjective subject and should be treated as such, it does not deserve to be taught as fact. There are plenty of very intelligent people on the other side of the argument as well so, this point is moot.

 

[DavisBJ]

You present your sarcasm as if you are a true believer in the fallacy of evolution. Don't waste your breath, or fingers if you will, backing up your supposition, I and others have heard it before. Evolution is a subjective subject and should be treated as such, it does not deserve to be taught as fact. There are plenty of very intelligent people on the other side of the argument as well so, this point is moot.

You are right, there are intelligent people on the other side. Newton was involved in alchemy, and he was smart. I had a friend who graduated from MIT, and firmly believed in astrology. Thousands of smart people subscribed to Aristotle’s earth-centered cosmology before Galileo, some US presidents were measured for phrenology studies. Yup, those things need to taught right along with the silliness about the earth being round, and the nonsense in chemistry about atoms that no one can even see.

 

[Alate_One]

And I know you don't believe by your testimony. God said "six days". It is over.

That same passage refers to the sky as having water supported by a firmament, a hard dome. I don't think God was telling us that the earth has a dome for a sky. Ancient human beings are conveying the essential message that God wished to convey, that one God created a good earth. They just happened to use the standard middle eastern creation account as a format.

That message stands in stark contrast to very similar creation accounts from other people in the same area, that used a similar pattern but placed a multitude of Gods as the driving force and that humanity and the earth were an accident.

All you have to do is figure out how he did it in six days. Instead, you testify against his Word.

Six days isn't the central message of the text. Many Christians of the past realized this long before the science was clear.

You are lost, and frankly, I don't care.

If you don't care why do you bother neg repping me?

21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22 Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’

16"You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? 17"So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. 18"A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. 19"Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.

What is your fruit Nick? All I see from you is hate.

 

[Ktoyou]

One thing is for sure true, the idiot developmental psychologists were wrong about spanking small children. Children should respect their parents and learn what their parents want them to learn, it is not a decision made outside the family. No reason religion cannot be taught in grade school, the Catholics do it, and a good job compared to public school.

 

[Arthur Brain]

A sharp rebuke is the correct path to perverts like your self, retard77. He denies the Word before men, I know where its heart is. And alate one is a raging moron that cheated through school. And gave the heathen proffessors the answers they wanted to shake their fist at God. AO is one of the worst people here, as you are also.

Alate One is a woman Nick, so it's 'she' not 'he'. You can't even get that right. How in blazes do you figure she 'cheated through school' as well? Sources for that accusation? You really are just full of self righteous bile, and bile is all it actually amounts to. You haven't exhibited one fledgling clue as regards biology and science in general frankly. Your idea of a 'sharp rebuke' is to act like a baby who's lost it's dummy Nick, else lets hear your expertise in the realm of science then? Heck, at least Stripe has some sort of qualification in it....

I doubt you even know where the brain is never mind the heart Nick. Get a grip and grow up. If you think any rebuke should involve calling people 'retards' then you're as childish and immature as it gets (not that that was any great secret really....)

lain: