what should be put in he science books???

Question

over the past few years people have been debating whether or not to put in evolution (Darwin's theory) or religious viewpoint( Adam and Eve Or God created the universe...or any other religion saying something else..) in a science book..But science is all about the facts...and they havent REALLY proved either one..so y should only one b in there...how about both?

Answer 1

Evolution has been proven, and you can see it happen in your own life time with lesser animals whose life span may be a week, with like fruit flies. You can see the changes happen over a thousand generations, right with your own eyes. They have seen the same thing happen in frogs. If that is not some sort of proof that evolution exist on some level, or even enough to be put in a science book, then there is something wrong with the world. There is absolutely no proof what so ever that Adam and Eve ever existed. Just because a book is old, does not make it true. Most of the people that lived back in that day didn't even know that our sun was a star pretty much like most others in the sky that we see at night. It makes me sad to see that one book can make some people so close minded that they refuse to be educated properly. The world and the Universee as well as our understanding of it, is an ever changing thing. The Bible is not. If we can not change in our way of thinking along with the Univers we will be doomed to extinction, and that's a fact.

Answer 2

I'm a full time student and I science tutor at my school. I live in Kansas, so I'm right in the middle of the debate. The problem with putting both Christian and Darwin theories to this is those aren't the only two. Since Christian is a religion, it crosses the line between church and state PLUS they'd have to represent other religion's theories, also. It's the same with Darwin really except without the religious controversy.

Answer 3

Evolution should be included, only because Darwin is very important to our history, and his theories are quite likely and still trying to be proven in society today.

Religion on the other hand should not, school and religion are seperate, and it would harm people who don't believe in Christianity.

Darwin-science, a theory that may be true
Religion-not a fact, a belief that will not ever be proven

Answer 4

When we learned about evolution, we were presented with various carefully-worded viewpoints: Darwin, Lamarck, and a "religious superpower" which was touched upon in the Origin of Life unit.

Answer 5

Actually, evolution isn't merely a theory, it really should be called fact. Scientists have seen evolution in progress, know the mechanisms that cause the evolutionary process (natural selection, genetic drift, mutation, etc.), and are discovering more about genetics and species transformation every day. SCIENCE should be taught in SCIENCE textbooks. Other "theories" should be taught it religious texts where they belong.

Answer 6

I think if they include religious "origin" stories in science classes, then we should also teach another viable, potentiially true option called "directed panspermia" -- the theory that life was planted on this once-barren rock by a far-advanced alien culture.

Answer 7

Darwin is not religion
Religon is supposed to be kept out of schools

Answer 8

How about just dodging the subject of the beginning of all things and in its place putting "no one knows for sure how it all began, but this is what we do know" and then skip right into natural biology and geology.


Or, better yet, we should all home school and teach our kids what we want them to learn.

Answer 9

So, the Christian view point is the only one to put in? There are alot of different "stories" of how life started.
Science belongs in public schools. If parents are concerned about their kids learning the myth of creationism, they need to put them in private schools.

Answer 10

If you think Darwin has not been proven yet....you're teachers should be fired.