How do you feel about evolution being taught in schools?

Question

As a high school student, I am strongly opposed to the teaching of evolution in school. Not only do I think that they are teaching us lies and using false "evidence" to get us to worship "science" like they do, but things like origins of people and the earth are up to parents to teach their kids. I believe in God and the word of the Bible, so why should the school system feel free to trample on my beliefs and teach me otherwise? They say creation can't be taught in school (on that note, I think neither should be taught in public schools, but if they teach evolution they should have something about creation in there too), but in teaching evolution, they are imposing their beliefs on us, and while it may not be religion that they're teaching us, to them, evolution is their belief, and we shouldn't be forced to be taught science's beliefs. (I refuse to call evolution science and refer to its support as evidence.) Anyways, if you got this far, how do you feel?

Let me clarify myself -- I have learned plenty about evolution for the past 6 years in school. I have refuted it on my own; I haven't been brainwashed to refute it. Also, I don't deny all of evolution. I believe in adaptations within a species, but not evolution from one species to something completely different (like monkey to human). This is the only form of evolution that beleivers in God can believe. Evolution is not a creative force (it isn't responsible for our existence); God is. Scientists that study evolution are so eager to disprove God and prove themselves right that they're bilnded by the facts of the outdated aging methods, disproved theories, etc, etc that they're so reliant on here to prove their theory.

Answer 1

I think it's absolutely disgusting. If all the bleeding heart liberal jerks outlawed teaching children about God in school, why should they be able to teach evolution?

Answer 2

I agree with you, though I think that schools should teach both. I think you should be allowed to study both theories side by side.

The truth is, we don't really know what happened. Neither one qualifies as a scientific theory - they are not practical lab science. They both fall under origin science, which is a whole different beast. Actually, both of them qualify, technically, as religious beliefs...one acknowledges God, the other doesn't.

(I have read both Origin of the Species and the Bible. I have compared evidence on both sides in many different branches of science, and decided for myself what I believe.)

There is no way we can scientifically prove either one - the events cannot be repeated, observed, or falsified. It's actually more like archaelogy than anything else. We have to go off of the evidence, without knowing 100% how that evidence got there - we have to make guesses and hope they're right.

I don't have a problem with evolution being taught...but I do have a problem with it being taught as absolute fact. It's not, and any honest scientist will tell you that. It's simply the theory that the majority holds to right now. Oddly enough, many of the theories that it stems from have been disproven (uniformitarianism and others), and there are times that evidence that doesn't agree with it is disregarded; this is why I have a problem with it being taught as fact. It's a theory and should be treated like one.

I think that kids should be shown the evidence, taught about the various theories, and be given the choice to believe what they see as right. I feel that it's wrong to be so completely one-sided on something that cannot be proven one way or the other.

Answer 3

I personally do not believe in evolution, but I think that it should be taught as a theory, along with the theories of abrupt appearance and intelligent design. If they won't teach all possible theories, they should leave the study of the origins of life out, and focus on what CAN be proven. There is a lot of biology that consists of how life functions on earth today, rather than how it got here. You can learn all about cells, anatomy, food chains, ecosystems, etc. without having to decide how it all got there.

Answer 4

These are pretty serious accusations:
"they are teaching us lies and using false "evidence" to get us to worship "science" like they do"

What, do you suppose, is the motive of "they" (teachers and scientists, presumably) in lying to you?
What "they" are trying to do is eduacte you in what current science understands about what the world is like and how it works. Now accepting evolution does mean you have to discount that the bible is *literally* true, but it does not mean you have to disbelieve in God, and it does not mean that you cannot take some of the Old Testament as *moral tales* or parables, teaching lessons on how to live your life.

Remember that a professional scientist will have undertaken (at least) a further 6-10 years of study beyond high school before becoming professional, and will have continued to learn and study as a professional scientist. They *really* do know more than you about the theory (and the facts) of evolution.

And as for your assertion that you have "learned plenty about evolution for the past 6 years in school", I have to say that if you don't accept it, you don't understand it. And if you have refuted it on your own, what is your evidence for having done so?

There is no scientific evidence for Creationism. The people who use false "evidence" are anti-evolutionists, and they are trying to to get you to worship the Christian God like they do. But their belief in the literal truth of the bible does not stand up to scientific investigation:
Even discounting evolution, how did the light from stars farther than ~6,000 light years away reach us? Why are there trees in north america (the Californian Bristlecone pine) that can be dated by standard ring-counting to over 10,000 years old? None of these depend on "outdated aging methods" - which, BTW, are *not* outdated.

Scientists are *not* "eager to disporove God": science can tell us *nothing* about God. God exists in the realm of the supernatural, and science deals with the physical - so it cannot investigate or comment on God's existance at all.

Edit:
You are correct that evolution is not a creative force. No scientist has ever claimed that evolution is how life arose on earth: evolution is about how life *changes* (and has changed) on earth. The science of how life began is called Abiogenesis, and is still highly controvercial with no strong enough evidence for any of the hypotheses to make them widespread.

Answer 5

Hmmmm, well, as a teacher, I try to teach my students to think for themselves. I tell them theories of evolution, but when they bring up religious beliefs, I say that yes, people believe that as well.

I do tell my students that there is no discounting the facts - that human beings DO look very much like other members of the primate species. That some apes behave today very much the way our long ago ancestors must have behaved, with their rudimentary knowledge of using simple tools to help them with their work.

That yes, human beings are ANIMALS the same as other animals. We are smarter than other creatures, which is why we have been able to rise above our intended niche in the ecosystem (we are certainly not larger, stronger, scarier, faster or anything else -- in fact, I tell my students, if we didn't have the intelligence we have, we would be very much defenseless prey for much larger, stronger predators such as wolves, lions, bears, etc.)

I also teach about religions of the world and the various cultures of human society. we discuss the beliefs not only of christians and Catholics, but of Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, etc. We look at the development of human society from every conceivable vantage point.

My students come into my classroom with their own beliefs, and I do not challenge their beliefs - in fact, I encourage them to continue to believe in something - I teach them the beliefs of other human beings (besides their parents) as well, and tell them to decide for themselves what they believe.

Most of my studens learn to think outside the box, beyond what they have been told to believe. They become accepting of others' beliefs. In the end, I believe, that is what our students should ultimately be taught - tolerance for all others' beliefs, whatever they may be. The first step towards tolerance is understanding.....So I strive to teach them to understand all the different viewpoints that are out there.

Answer 6

I agree with the first answerer. You don't know enough and you cannot evaluate either science or religion as THE basis for any life having been created. You must look at both sides.

As for myself, I think that teaching about evolution is a good thing. I believe that some force (God) created everything, and from having created simpler life forms God allowed those to grow and change into other life forms. Over billions of years, the life forms that exist now are those that were created. I further believe that evolution will continue and new and different, or at least modified and adapted, life forms will come to exist.

I see nothing wrong with teaching evolution alongside religion. The knowledge and balance of both is essential. It is when one goes to the extreme (to deny either side) that things go horribly wrong. I don't believe that Adam and Eve were created as it is taught in Genesis in the Bible. I believe they came gradually into existance and we are the result of billions and billions of years in evolution. I do believe in God and God is the Creator of all things.

Every single day with every single thing you see, from a grain of sand to an airplane flying over the city and everthing in between, you see God at work.

Answer 7

I agree that evolution could learn in public colleges. it is so attractive and we are privileged to stay at a time as quickly as all of us know approximately it. the magnitude of coaching evolution in colleges could be seen extremely contained in the direction of the comments of answerers like "Siobhean Hill" (see different solutions) who seems to have faith that apes have stopped evolving in basic terms because of the fact they have not replaced interior the final 200 years that we've been observing them or that the word "concept" means "an concept which would be incorrect". for this reason, had the answerer been top knowledgeable on evolution, they might understand that the transformations in apes would not be substantive interior the time that we've had to visual show unit them and that the transformations happen over hundreds of thousands of years. (additionally they declare that we share no longer something with apes!!!????) a lot of human beings additionally would desire to extra applicable understand the assumption of evidence. For too long, non secular human beings have stated that evolution won't be able to be to blame for the existence on earth because of the fact there are gaps interior the evidence. i'd prefer to point out that there is extremely some evidence and the gaps are narrowing. there is easily NO medical evidence for creationism in any respect.

Answer 8

I have developed my own set of theories and beliefs that discounts neither science nor religion, but what I believe is not the issue here. How did I come to this person truth? I studied EVERYTHING I could. I wanted to know anyone and everyone's take on the origin and creation of life, regardless of my initial opinion or the opinions of others. We are not on this planet to be mere copies of those before us. It is our job to learn all we can, grow from it, and share that learning when possible. I now share this learning with you:
The truth you find yourself feels better than the truth you borrow from someone else. Can anyone know 100% of the truth? No, they gather information and fill the rest in with faith (of any kind).
The worst mistake you can make is to take anything without examination and reflection.

Answer 9

I agree with you 100%.

By the way, secret's argument can be turned around to apply to creation very easily.


www.answersingenesis.org
All the evidence a scientist has exists only in the present. All the fossils, the living animals and plants, the world, the universe—in fact, everything—exists now, in the present. The average person (including most students) is not taught that scientists have only the present and cannot deal directly with the past. Evolution is a belief system about the past based on the words of men who were not there, but who are trying to explain how all the evidence of the present (that is, fossils, animals, and plants, etc.) originated.
Webster’s Dictionary defines religion as follows: “Cause, principle or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith.” Surely, this is an apt description of evolution. Evolution is a belief system—a religion!

Answer 10

Have you been hurt by learning the theory of evolution? Most of us experience sitting through the presentation of ideas in a classroom that we disagree with/dislike. We wouldn't learn much about the world if we limited ourselves to only the ideas/beliefs that we find agreeable. Your goal as a student is to learn about ideas that exist, not to agree with them.

Answer 11

You can think whatever you want.

Unfortunately you are limiting yourself. You cannot become a geneticist, a botanist, a molecular biologist, or work in many other scientific fields with that attitude. A more dangerous idea is that you want to limit other peoples potential.

The nice thing is that you have no say. EVERY state in the union mandates evolution as one of their key standards. Our highest co urts have repeatedly weighed in on the importance of science to our society. it will be rightly taught.

edit -

Your statement: (like monkey to human)

rutgers felt the need to post a specific misconception outline. You are seeming to believe what some in the cult thinking crowd push on youngsters like yourself. see the link yourself. I wont touch the young earth ideas.

"Statements like these reflect a lack of understanding about common ancestry and phylogeny" (from the link)