[RANT] Evolution vs Creationism

[Sar]

BBC NEWS | Education | Call for creationism in science

I'm sorry, but there's absolutely no place in a Science class for religious points of view.

The two points of view regarding Creationism and Evolutionary theory are diametrically opposed. You either teach science or you teach religion.

Would the Creationists like it if the establishment started forcing the view of Darwinists, or indeed followers of Dawkins down their childrens' throats during their R.E. lessons?

I don't think so.

[rynnor]

Lol - it should be considered a cultural worldview - what a load of crap!

Education is going down the pan - my kids infant school teaches Braingym which is utterly discredited pseudo science - feels like we are going backwards...

[SawTooTH]

Originally Posted by rynnor

Lol - it should be considered a cultural worldview - what a load of crap!

Education is going down the pan - my kids infant school teaches Braingym which is utterly discredited pseudo science - feels like we are going backwards...

Scientists or should I say Physisists should stop bringing god into science.
Calling the Higgs-bosen the god particle is a bit stupid

[Sar]

It was a 1998 Nobel winning physicist, Leon Lederman, head of Fermilab who coined it, and it was the title of a book he wrote in 1993.

Probably to sell books. But he had justification for calling it that.


Apparantly.

[Wij]

This world needs more James Randi.

[DaGaffer]

Actually, if you read the article:

Originally Posted by BBC

Teachers should take the time to explain why creationism had no scientific basis, Prof Reiss said.

He stressed that the topic should not be taught as science.

I think that's fair enough. The role of a teacher isn't just to say "learn this, its on the board" (as a lot of my teachers did), its to encourage pupils to think. You can't do this just by ignoring something; better to address it and show why its not science.

[old.Tohtori]

Exactly said above by Gaffy.

They should teach them both, creationisism and science, then let pupils decide and figure things by themselves.

Saying "religion isn't science" is like teaching kids "rome isn't in jamaica".

[00dave]

Sounds like you're talking bollocks again.

Surely studying creationism is what religious education is for.

[nath]

Originally Posted by old.Tohtori

They should teach them both, creationisism and science, then let pupils decide and figure things by themselves.

That implies that creationism and evolution should be considered equal and that it's OK for kids to make a decision between the two. It's just not, creationism is batty shit. If they start teaching it, they should teach the flying spaghetti monster theories too.

[Wazzerphuk]

Originally Posted by nath

It's just not, creationism is batty shit.

Nath's from Staines in the mid-nineties!

[nath]

You're the one who took batty to mean gay, I meant loony!

Bat shit crazy, if you'd like something more contemporary

[chipper]

Originally Posted by 00dave

Sounds like you're talking bollocks again.

Surely studying creationism is what religious education is for.

nothing else needs to be said creationism is based on god ie religious education science is about fact RE is about fiction

[Sar]

Exactly my point. Creationism has no place in a science class, and thankfully the Government are in agreement.

Creationists are a bunch of fucking whack jobs who completely ignore all the evidence that tells them that their ideology is a pile of crap.

The universe was created 6,000 years ago?

Fucks sake, The Queen's been on the throne longer than that ffs :P

[SawTooTH]

In the paper today I read that the Humanist society lost a case for Humanism being taught in religeous education classes as its not a religion. I always thought that RE was understanding other peoples beliefs. A belief in a naturilistic world view is a belief system in my book, backed up by reason and understanding. On the other hand Christians seem to want the right to present their unsustantiated claims for creation in science classes. Hmm

[chipper]

to be fair to the guy ive just actually read the article and he doesnt say that creationalism should be taught as truth more that if a child asks a question along the lines of god made the earth in 7 days the science teacher can explain that this is absolute bolloxs and talk them through a scientific explanation and why the creationalist version cannot be true

i actually agree with what hes saying its better to tell a student why they are wrong than simply say your wrong and ignore that child for the rest of that lesson.