• No. But, I also think that it's important to present more than one idea when several are available for something that is yet unsolved. Also, it's important to teach our children about other ideas and religions as part of their education so that they can understand other people different from themselves without rejecting them automatically.
  • Well, you can't prove that Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy don't exist.... Now, I'm not saying that you shouldn't teach these things, but you shouldn't teach them in a way that makes people think that they are equal to something that has been proven to be true.
  • It is a bit like teaching conspiracy theories that cannot be be proven false as being legitimate subject material. I feel both should be left off the curriculum and allow the individual to make up there own mind when they get older.
  • This argument doesn't make any sense, evolution could easily be proven wrong. If anyone finds a rabbit fossil in the Cambrium strata, evolution's got a serious problem. That's the whole point of science, it works with testable hypotheses, and scientists can peer review papers on it. Not some made up bullshit that can't be disproven like a supernatural creator.
  • first of all abiogenesis is a THEORY. it proves NOTHING, sorry. the so called EXPERIMENTS, only show a little part of possible life it doesnt SUPPORT any theory, including abiogenesis. i can prove that the sun is made of sulphur by lighting a match. thats about as close as your experiments are to facts of the theory abiogenesis. how silly. 2ndly. i am a chemist and a biologist. it fascinates me..that evolutionist scientists,.. the HONEST professionals that they are... DO DISMISS and DISCARD thousands of fossils that INTRUDE ON the WRONG sediment layers , my neice is an archeologist, phd. i have visited and helped on digs around the world more than several times. and ive seen the way scientists dismiss these "abnomalities" first hand.
  • Actually it is very difficult to prove a negative. We can't prove their is a flying spaghetti monster (famous quote of richard Dawkins). But the principle is true stays the same there are many things we cannot prove false.
  • Yes! It would make school much more interesting. And the electives list LOOOOOONG. I think it would be fun.
  • i think that religion should be taken out of any school that is not a "religious school". Public schools have no place teaching kids religious thoughts - that is up to the parent and the child, and if the parent feels strongly enough, then they can put their kid in religious schools.
  • I think it would be wise not to teach about just one religion, but many if you have to. Otherwise conflicts arise. For example teach about Christianity, Judaism, and Islam one year, then animism, Budhism, and Hinduism another year... Science must be taught because it is useful in life. Religion is important also if you want a non-biast new generation. So both should be taught, but not just one religion. Is parents say no ten things can change, but I think it is important.
  • my view is that only things with scientfic backing should be taught in schools
  • I think it's right that schools should teach them both but make sure they know that neither have actually been proven. Give them the choice what to believe in their lives.
  • I don't think there's enough curricular room in a science class to teach everything that can't be proven false. E.g., even if creationism hasn't been proven to be false, neither has alien migration, magic rock biogenesis, nor Roman mythology. When it comes to the sciences, what should be taught is what has been scientifically verified. The teaching of creationism is more appropriate for whatever religious school teaches it. I haven't heard about any Evolutionists demanding that evolution be taught in Catholic Sunday school, or outside of any public secular educational institution.
  • Creationists use circular arguments in a way that allows them to be deceitful. The Flying Spaghetti Monster cannot be proven false.
  • WE teach all sorts of concepts that cannot be proven so why not creation.
  • One or the other may be true but the evidence is NOT equally valid. Despite all the window dressing, evolution is a theory and intelligent design is a kludge.

Copyright 2020, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy