Evolution Poll

[bryant69]

Poll question: Evolution Poll

The policy question of evolution is simple enough. Should teachers teach evolution or creationism or both? My bet is that most people here, religious or otherwise, favor teaching Evolution. I'll bet they support it by an overwhelming percentage.

I could be wrong.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Avalux]

1. Let me catagorize my answer

Only evolution should be taught in SCIENCE class - creationism does not belong because there's no PROOF.
If a school wants to offer an elective theology class that explores creationism plus others religious THEORIES on the origins of man, that would be fine with me.

[Toucano]

3. Right On!

Creation myths belong in Comparative Religion class.

Only science in the science class.

[MostlyLurks]

7. AMEN (In a secular way, of course)!

And here I thought I was the only person in America to hold this seemingly "discordant" idea.

Frankly, I would *love* it if schools offered some sort of philosphy/debate/etc. type class in which ANYTHING could be addressed and discussed in an open, moderated and productive forum. I haven't a fear of information or ideas and I find suspicious anybody who says they only want one idea to be posited in schools. I think such a class would reduce the coarseness and division we currently find so prevalent in our modes of discourse today.

But yes, evolution is for a science class and creationism should be in a philosophy class. Barring the massive installation of critical thought programs in our schools, creationism should be right out.

[Avalux]

8. Lots of us feel this way -

but don't hold your breath for critical thinking to rear it's head in public schools. They're too busy training our kids how to pass the standardized test at the end of the year so they can get more funding. :hi:

[yellowdogintexas]

24. It used to be called a "Humanities" class, and you could take it

if you were an honor student, or on the college track.

Definitely an elective. Explored all mythologies, philosophy at an introductory level, etc.

Only really large schools offered it too.

I remember being really jealous of my sister in law in Louisville who got to take this when my podunk high school did not offer it.

[pmbryant]

15. bingo!

I'll join the chorus in support of this response.

I couldn't answer the poll because I don't see any reason both can't be taught in school, but in science classes, creationism and its offspring "intelligent design" should not be taught as a valid, competing, "scientific" theory. Leave those subjects for philosophy or theology or religion or social studies classes.

--Peter

[rbnyc]

19. Bingo! (nt)

[u4ic]

32. Absolutely

I went to a Catholic high school and they did this...and there was never any conflict.

Mind you, it was pretty progressive...we had a priest teaching theology classes and explaining that the bible was their way of explaining the world, and most of it was embellished if not allegorical.

[bowens43]

2. Creationsim has no place in a science class.

I have no problem with it being taught in a comparative religion course as long as all of the major creation myths are discussed. As far as 'other theories' go, there are none.

[comradebillyboy]

4. when i was a science teacher i always talked about

creationism, and how it is a religous dogma, rather than science. an excellent counter-example of the scientific method.

[Benhurst]

5. Creationism should only be taught in school cafeterias, where

each child can be given a Holy Virgin toated cheese sandwich.

[mike_c]

17. cheesus crisco....

:eyes:

[signmike]

6. Teaching evo, but mentioning creationism with

a sneer, a smirk, an outright guffawhahahaha:7

[ecstatic]

9. Where did that very first atom come from?

All answers to this crucial question are FAITH BASED, whether rooted in religion or science. There is no getting around that, and for that reason, I don't think we should *only* teach evolution. Perhaps there is a middle ground that could be taught or at least discussed. Until the aforementioned question is answered thoroughly, we cannot throw all of our eggs into one basket.

[muriel_volestrangler]

11. But that's about the origin of the universe, not evolution of species

it's physics, not biology.

Belief in the biblical creation is the original conspiracy theory. Without evidence, someone made up a story about an all-powerful person who was behind everything that has happened; their reason for making up the story was to strengthen their point of view on who controls the world now. And a lot of people have fallen for it over the years, even when they are given evidence showing otherwise.

[abburdlen]

22. The first atoms

formed from the plasma soup that filled the young universe. As the universe expanded and cooled to about 3000K protons and neutrons "condensed" out of and began to interact and isotopes of hydrogen began to form soon after atoms of helium formed. Unlike creation stories there are falsifiable claims made by the Big Bang theory. Including the ratio of hydrogen to helium left over in the universe as well as the cosmic background microwave radiation.

Now did the sneeze of some omniscient being start the whole ball rolling? Beats me but questions that are not falsifiable shouldn't be taught as science.

[K-W]

27. If only you actually understood science,

you would understand that science doesnt involve any faith. Science presents the facts as we know them, presents nothing where we lack facts, and changes when new facts are found or old facts are discovered to be flawed or false.

Science doesnt provide one narrative of the world, it provides a way to test whether narratives of the world work or not. Thus there is no reason whatsoever to present some religions narrative alongside science. If that religions narrative held up to scrutiny, it would be a part of science class already.

[Spider Jerusalem]

10. Bad wording.

Second choice should be "other hypotheses". The intelligent-design nonsense doesn't meet the criteria for a scintific theory.

[Fleurs du Mal]

12. Evolution only

You can take creationism, comparative religion, etc., in high school or college as an elective. Keep that filthy mythology of death out of tax-payer funded schools. Oh, but that's why we're going vouchers now isn't it! :eyes:

[LakeCohoon]

13. I Favor Teaching The Theory Of DeEvolution

When I see a monkey setting at the Thanksgiving table, I will be convinced that the trend has reversed.

[yellowdogintexas]

25. don't go to Thanksgiving in Crawford, then

[LakeCohoon]

28. You've got it backwards

Actually, if I saw * sitting at that table, I would be convinced that the trend was accelerating.

[mark414]

14. definitely not creationism...but i'm not sure about evolution either

i suppose i'm an agnostic if you want to call me anything...i definitely don't believe in creationism but i'm not sure about evolution...some of it just seems like a bunch of crap to me, some of it doesn't...

i'm so confused!

[abburdlen]

23. There is a good chance

what you learned about evolution was from a science teacher that had no idea what he/she was talking about.

Pick up a copy of the latest National Geographic, there is a great story on evolution.

[Eugene]

16. Teach the Creation story as literature, not science.

The Creation story is part of our literary culture.
It is okay to discuss and criticize the Bible
as an important work of literature.
The public schools should not teach it
as actual history or scientific fact.

Science must be taught from the facts,
and the facts overwhelmingly support evolution.
Science education should also debunk
pseudoscience like Intelligent Design.

[DrWeird]

18. There's some ignorant fuckers voting in this thread.

Shame on you.

[depakid]

20. You want to teach comparative religion, fine- but

keep the mythology out of science class.

Why is that so hard for evangelicals to understand....

er, maybe it's because they don't believe in science?

[Ravenseye]

21. In Other Countries...

teaching creationism in biology class will garner a dropped jaw, a roll of the eyes, or a shocked blank expression.

My grandfather is a former methodist minister in England (former cause he's old and retired now, not that he lost his faith). He and his wife (my grandmother died when I was young) are very devout christians and attend church at least once a week, participate in christian charity functions etc.

Yet even to them teaching creationism in biology class is wrong.

Creationism belongs in a theology class, not a biology class. I for one have no problem with schools teaching theology as a non-required class. I also don't have a problem with having the ability to choose a homeroom or some such in schools that has a prayer. As long as they don't force prayer on my children, and don't teach theology in a biology class I have no problem with it.

Is that wrong?

[4_Legs_Good]

26. Creationism can and SHOULD be taught... in the world religions course

where it belongs.

david

[UdoKier]

29. Other. Creationism can be taught in comparative religion or history class

Evolution is scientific fact.

Creation bears no relation to science but is culturally important and deserves mention, but never in a science class.

[Mutley]

30. oddly enough...

evolution and creationism were tought in my high school in a literature class ( :wtf: ) as two opposing theories...

i didn't really understand why they did it that way....

but i voted that only evolution should be taught... in science class that is...

if they want to teach creationism in a theology class then go for it.

[ChairOne]

31. Even the good guys - DUers - get suckered into this kinda #$%$

Sheesh. Hey folks? How about we let the, um, SCIENTISTS decide what the facts are? That's um, why they, you know, EXIST!!!

In science classes, teachers should teach whatever scientists say... So evolution it is!

To say anything else is to be The Waterboy. We've already got 54 million too many - we don't need any more...