I do because it is taught as a pre-historic fact. Pre-historic means that it happened before men invented writing. I believe without men writing down factual information in the past it cannot even have a chance of being verified as fact. In addition, the scientific method says their has to be observation to be proven. Since no one can back in time and observe these theories they cannot be proven. Finally, it has many holes in the theory as well such as the fact that almost all animals need a male and a female to produce offspring yet evolution believes everything came from asexual single celled organisms. If that is true, why the need for two separate genders?
2007-05-16 18:47:31 · 37 answers · asked by Anonymous in Entertainment & Music ➔ Polls & Surveys
No. Some children might have interest in history & those sort of things.
2007-05-16 18:48:54 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 7⤋
You're basically saying that there has to be a human eyewitness to something in order to have any idea regarding whether or not something happened or, if it did happen, how it happened.
Clearly you've never read a Sherlock Holmes novel. Holmes, never witnessed an actual murder, but he was always able to put together evidence that he found and figure out what happened. The CSI shows on TV demonstrate this same methodology.
And, of course, if eyewitness accounts are NEVER wrong then thousands of people have actually been abducted by aliens, as at least that many people recollect such an event taking place.
In fact - and this is something else that crime novels and TV shows should tell you - human accounts are some of the least trustworthy sources of evidence that there is.
In regards to your question about two genders, that is easily answered as well. Some organisms, most notably yeast, can evolve either sexually or asexually. Scientific studies have shown that when there is a stable environment, yeast reproduce asexually. However when the environment is changing, they tend to reproduce sexually. Why? Because sexual reproduction "mixes" the genes of two individuals rather than just one and genetic adaptation to change (called 'evolution') can take place more quickly.
Isn't it fascinating how many things evolution can explain about our natural world?
2007-05-18 07:46:25 · answer #2 · answered by Randy C 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
By your reasoning, anything which happened before men started writing should not be taught. Does that include Adam and Eve and the Creation?
There is a lot of observable evolution, particularly at the microscopic level. Bacteria becoming resistant to drugs, viruses changing etc. This is macro-evolution, but at the microscopic level.
I've got news for you regarding asexual reproduction. Most of the creatures of this Earth, by number and weight, are either asexual or hermaphrodites, that is, they do not has separate genders. You are just not looking at the right animals. Think about nematodes (worms), many molluscs, bacteria, viruses etc.
You say no-one can back in time and see what happened. By the same token, you can not go back and see Adam and Eve, or anything being created, yet you believe it happened. You believe that the Bible was written by men guided by God, but you can't prove that they didn't make it all up. But still you believe it without proof. There are many discrepancies in the bible, leading no doubt to many separate religions and numerous denominations within each religion. Yet they all claim to be right. If supposed discrepancies invalidate evolution, why don't they invalidate all religion?
You are trying to argue against science by using religion. That is why this debate will go on for some time.
2007-05-17 18:00:23 · answer #3 · answered by Labsci 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm sorry, Sandstorm. I have to correct you on this. Evolution isn't taught as fact. That's why it's call the Theory of Evolution. It's best guess based on current scientific knowledge. If it was proven to be true without any possible doube, it would be a Law, not a Theory. Teaching this in school does not teach children misinformation, but only a set of widely recognized ideas that make sense. Teaching theories encourages children to explore and observe and learn what they can about the world around them. As children learn more about the world as they grow, they can modify their theories. Learning is a dynamic process, constantly changing. Teaching evolution should be continued. But I don't see why Intelligent Design shouldn't also be taught. It is another idea at the creation of the world and is equally valid. Children should be encourage to question and ponder the whys and wherefores.
2007-05-17 02:33:36 · answer #4 · answered by Erin 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Since no one was around to observe the formation of species what do you propose we teach the children. Evolution is a theory because there is no concrete proof but in this case very strong evidence that supports it which is why it is taught. As for different genders sexual reproduction has evolved over time because it increases gentic diversity and allows for more complex oranisms than prokaryotic bacteria. There are no flaws in the theory here the explanations are quite good and fit well with the whole picture. It should not be banned from schools
2007-05-16 19:16:21 · answer #5 · answered by haroldandsivakumar 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Oh My where to start. Science is different than religion. It is ok for science not to know everything and to change through time as new evidence is found. You may be confusing facts with evidence. Evidence does not need to be written. Fossils, coral, bones, rings in a tree all show evidence of age but are not written text. Science does not Believe anything. The evidence points to organisms multiplying in many ways (some are still a sexual and do not need 2 sex's)
Theories have gone through many tests and studies to be called theories. In fact in science the idea that the earth goes around the sun is still a theory. (Which the Bible reputes) Hope this helps
2007-05-16 18:58:03 · answer #6 · answered by Parrot Bay 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
well that's really weird because i just finished a unit on evolution in school (it was horrible, we had to act in a judge trial proving creationism is inaccurate) i don't think it should be banned but i believe the teachers should be open to suggestions from students on teachings of alternative theories, my friend gave the teacher a video explaning creationism and questioning the reality of evolution, my teacher said she's very open but she refused to let the class view it because the class was based on "proving evolution" so basically i think we should allow more than one theory. hope this helps =]
2007-05-17 12:47:50 · answer #7 · answered by Liquid♥Onyx 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well they`re banning the bible, what does that tell you? I believe we have obviously evolved in various ways but the concept of evolution is simply a tool to deny the existence of God.
2007-05-17 09:04:15 · answer #8 · answered by Michael9 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I myself do not believe in evolution, but I do not think it should be banned from schools. I believe that everyone has a right to believe what they want and banning it from schools is trying to tell our kids that they should not believe in it. In my eyes it's about as bad as not allowing religion into schools.
2007-05-16 18:52:00 · answer #9 · answered by Steven's Love 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I do not believe evolutionary theory should be banned from schools. Many facts from over 10,000 years of civilization point towards evolution. If we didn't share a common ancestor with apes, then why is our DNA %99.89 the same as theirs?
It is true that the fossil record is not complete, but I think it makes alot more sense than Creationism alone.
I believe in God but I also believe in Evolution. Perhaps God used Evolution as his tool to create humanity? Perhaps not?
2007-05-16 18:53:52 · answer #10 · answered by Neuromancer 3 · 4⤊ 3⤋
Since evolution contradicts many religions and there is a separation of religion and state, it should be banned.
XOXO
2007-05-17 10:04:02 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋