Evolution in schools: If it's just a theory, then why........?

Question

do creationists want to not have evolution taught in schools, but don't care about all the other theories in science?

I may only be a high school student, but so much of the science we learn is theory:

The Cellular Theory
Einstein's Theory of Relativity

All of those scientific elements that have been accepted by the vast majority of scientists are only theories, yet creationists don't care about whether they are taught in schoos, yet evolution and global warming are so tabbo.

Creationists that don't want evolution taught in public schools for religous reasons don't have a valid arguement at all, but

Creationists now say the reason why they dont want it taught is because it is only Theory, and may not be true...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if we only taught scientific Laws, and completly ignorred vastly accepted theories due to controversy, students would miss out on great learning oppertunites and there may be no future scientists to actually prove or disdrove them.

I fully believe in evolution, but if another explanation comes along with more proof and more logical/scientific reasoning, I would surely switch over, but for know evolution is the best explanation we have.

I also find it ridiculous that my bio teacher had to give a "disclaimer" before doing a lesson on evolution so as to not create any backlash from creationist parents. Any one else think religon hinders scientific progress?

Answer 1

Creationists: Go read a science book please.
Evolution = The observation that life changes over time.

no more, no less.

It does not address nor care about the origin of life.
It does not address nor care about the origin of Earth.
It does not address nor care about about the origin of the universe.
It does not address nor care about gods or creators.

It is simply the observation that life changes over time. It is observed, documented, and proven true time and time again. Any other argument you apply to it is merely you being deceived by your clergyman.

Do you want to know why they deceive you? It is because they, for whatever reason, want the earth to be 6,000 years old. Nowhere in the Bible does it say this. Even genesis says a minute to god is like a thousand years to us... giving a reasonable explanation for the 7 day creation to god being billions of years of Man's time.
Yet, as the churches, and most vehemently the baptists, demand a 6,000 year old earth, the time line shown in evolution, cosmology, and geology denies them their non-biblical age of the earth.
Instead of trying to prove their position (because they know it to be false) they enlist the uneducated masses of their church to wage war for them. A few snippets of false information and you are quite willing to strap that bomb on and sacrifice yourself to make noise among those more educated than you.

Please, go educate yourself and see just how far astray your 'moral' leaders have lead you.

Answer 2

if creation cannot be taught in school, why should evolution, there r so many cracks in that theory, and people get mad when God is taught, people just r scared of religion, and should listen to the actual facts

before u say creationists dont have a valid argument, u should really look research everything because people dont realize all of the evidence against evolution and all of the hoax's

especially the fossils, i dont understand how from finding a small part (i mean a FRACTION) of the jaw, (especially ones that are identical to various monkeys) will enable scientists to develop entire pictures of "ape men" that makes no sense to me, i mean if i found a small fossil thing, could i really just draw a picture, like how would u know if they were hairy or what color they were from a tooth, i mean seriously come on, that is just ridiculous, and also, that lucy fossil, if studied, it very closely resembles this one type of chimpanzee

so before u swear of creation, i think u should actually hear both sides of the story, because that is what i did, i mean obviously things change over time, but not that much, especially the way it came in, like the big bang theory, so i think u need to study this way more before making such a ridiculous statement

Answer 3

Evolution is the mainstream scientific view on how the diversity of life on Earth came about. There is a mountain of evidence supporting it, has never been falsified and therefore should be taught where appropriate in science classes (particularly in biology classes).

We should not teach Intelligent Design (ID) or creationism in science classes because neither of them are considered to be science. For the same reason we should not teach astrology in astronomy class, nor should we teach alchemy in chemistry class.

I do actually endorse having students learn about ID in school, as long as it is not in a science class. Eventually those students will become parents and have some influence on the science curriculae of their children's schools. Because of that, they should understand what is wrong with teaching things like ID in science classes.

I believe that the best way to teach it would be to have a discussion of the Judge's decision in the Dover, PA, Intelligent Design case in a Social Studies or Civics class.

Answer 4

I am appalled that your biology teacher had to make a disclaimer about biology. Which state do you live in? But, good for you not to fall for the creationist stuff as a high school student.

If creationists think scientific theory isn't related to fact and evidence, they should jump out a window and test the theory of gravity.

Answer 5

I enjoyed the question and the responses!

Religion does not equal science.
Sience does not equal Religion.

Religion depends on faith. There is nothing more important than faith. It guides us when we may not have an answer. It helps us accept who we are and why we are here. It makes us strive to be better individuals and causes us to help others.
Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Science, at least good science, depends on evidence and things seen. Hope and unseeable evidence have no place in science.

Religion explains things that unexplainable.
Science explains things that can be witnessed and tested and repeated.

One field is most difficult and should be persued by the wisest of mankind. The other should be persued by only the smartest.

Answer 6

Evolution is widely accepted as a theory only because a law requires a duplication of the phenomenon under study. Since it is nearly impossible for us to duplicate the first cells forming and evolving, we cannot call evolution a law. However, there is so much evidence that supports the theory, it is essentially accepted as a law and as such is taught in schools. Schools simply teach what is most widely accepted as of date, this includes any subject. Hope that helps.

Answer 7

I agree. Why can't the creationists go along with "yes there is evolution, and it's all part of God's plan"? Here's another one for you....a teacher in a N.E.Pa. public school got called in to the principal's office because a mad parent insisted....she said "God bless you" to a kid who sneezed, and the family is athiest. She said, "well, if there's no such thing as God, then I guess I didn't say anything". We have to be so PC anymore.

Answer 8

It was brought to my attention by one of my professors in college that, in science, nothing is ever really "proven" and that is why scientific findings are referred to as theories. These theories may have loads of data supporting them, but are still called 'theories'. The concepts that we refer to as 'laws' are theories that are SO widely accepted, that they are assumed to be true.

As for the creatiionishts, IN MY OPINION, I think they are desperately trying to grasp on to stories of the bible and whatnot. I don't know exactly. But don't get too discouraged, even the Vatican acknowledges evolution.

Answer 9

What you need to do is understand what a theory is. It sounds as if you believe it is something less than a statement of fact supported by considerable evidence that has withstood the test of time.

Answer 10

The reason why I am opposed to the Theory of Evolution being taught in school is simply because of the subject matter. It is a theory that deals with how life came to exist on this planet. When we talk of the cellular theory or the theory of relativity, we are not banned from considering the opposing view or thoughts of others who criticize those theories.

With Darwinism, however, we can not offer the alternative (and widely more accepted) theory of how life came to exist on our planet. We are forbidden to. We are not OPPOSED to evolution; we are opposed to evolution being the ONLY legal explanation available to our children.

Look at it this way. The separation of church and state protects the rights of Christians, Jews, Muslims, Mormons Etc. from being trampled on or controlled by the government. At the same time it forbids these views from being taught in public schools.

Now, this is where it gets interesting. Atheists enjoy the same protection under the constitution, the freedom to hold their own religious beliefs, but those beliefs, most noticeably evolution, are markedly NOT banned from public schools. So how is it fair that their religion, even if it is a fundamental "non-religion" is the only position allowed to be taught in schools?

It isn't.

There is just as much data that disproves Evolution as there is that helps to prove it. Even this is not allowed to be taught in school. A school teacher from Kentucky mentioned the fossil record not supporting the theory of evolution (look up pre-Cambrian period) and the ACLU sued the school distract for millions of dollars. The teacher lost his job and the children of that school district suffered.

He never mentioned religion.

There are countless other incidences like this across the country. This is where the largest of our qualms comes from.

I for one believe that evolution is pretty much true, though I believe that it is a tool of God. I would be happier to see ALL opposing theories of how life came to exist on this planet than to see NO theory at all. But I do believe that this should be an all or nothing case.