Evolution on "trial" in Kansas
 

LINK

Ok here we go I am sure I will be bombed for this statement, so please make sure you read it clearly prior to judging me.

Evolution is a theory. Christianity is a religion that gives a "theory" for creation. Evolution should in NO WAY be taught as fact. If evolution is taught, then creationism should be taught along side of it as two opposite theories by a science teacher who understands both theories.

Christians should not get fooled into believing that God started the evolution process, because that is not biblical. I do believe in adaptation of humans and animals (for instance we are taller now then we use to be), but the theory that the earth has been around for Billions of years is not biblical. People have a right to believe what ever they want but children should not be exclusively taught one theory as fact in a public school.

Ok let the bombing begin.

The journal Nature's stance on ID

Sweetheart, ADPi Conniebama,

I wish it were just about a belief system and a choice. But given the field that I am in and my career, there are many quickly advancing techonologies that the strongest literal interpretation of the Bible is incapable of answering directly...

That is why many scientists refrain from applying a Puritanical view to science because one must free one's mind to be open to the possibilities that some issues in science can be resolved, then some will not... Period.

We either deal with it or we don't...

The fact is, if you have been vaccinated against measles/mumps/rubella, then you are practicing evolution...

If you eat any food from a regular grocery chain, then you are practicing evolution...

If you are driving a car, then you are practicing evolution...

I think God is into Revolution--spelled Revelations...

God could care less about what humans believe...

"It is important to note that biological evolution refers to populations and not to individuals and that the changes must be passed on to the next generation. In practice this means that,

Evolution is a process that results in heritable changes in a population spread over many generations."
(the above is from a "definition of evolution" from the web)


The fact is, if you have had a vaccination for measles/mumps/rubella, then you are practicing evolution... (ADAPTATION)

If you eat any food from a regular grocery chained market, then you are practicing evolution... (SHOPPING)

If you are driving a car, then you are practicing evolution... (TRANSPORTATION)

I am not saying for a teacher to "preach" the "puritanical view to science." I am saying for teachers not to teach a theory as fact. EVOLUTION IS A THEORY.

But what are heritable units that change in an environment as measured in science?

It is DNA. And the DNA mutation rates are readily measured by sequencing the genome.

There is also epigenetic phenomena that explain how phenotypes are diverse...


Adaptation is a manifestion of evolution as a process of Natural Selection...

Natural Selection occurs through 5 main processes... One that most know is survival of the fittest. The ability of a population to survive given the damage of its environments...

Adaptation is another process of Natural Selection--we just deal with it... Have you ever had measles/mumps/rubella or diptheria/pertussis toxin? Polio? If you have and you know you would die from it without a vaccine, then wouldn't you find a way to adapt with your higher ordered thinking that a mere microbe with genetic information and LIVE?

Most food from all large grocery chains are treated for sterility. Unless it says organic, all foods are probably irradiated or animals treated with antibiotics so that their food products would be safe for human consumption...

Without that treatment, many folks during the depression died due to starvation because crops failed and animals died to disease--all caused by human's over farming in the great plains states...

The lessons learned from that with FDR's "new deal" program made it possible for the farming collective to avoid an environmental catastrophe that was caused by humans...

The idea of a perpetual motion machine is an engineering feat that no one ever imagined. Then the advent of petroleum based fuels to propel a car transportation made it possible to things that could even fly...

Man is not suppose to fly, otherwise he'd be given wings...

However, if you have been in an airplane recently, man has found a way to defeat gravity for a time period, at least...

I wish it was just about a "theory" that unsupported without facts... But what is a theory? And how does one do science?

Now, if you WANT to argue that structure, then science must adhere to some constructs that "ID" cannot cross without the "politicizing" of it, which hinders invention, innovation and evolution...

Like I said, God could care less about what humans think with what was done...

God is more interested in "Revelation" of the human Spirit...

And even that is being "mapped" to some neurological transmitters that are proteins, which originate from heritable units--as DNA...

You can try to muddy the waters between adaptation and evolution but they are not the same thing.

I assure you God does care about whether we believe his Word.

Evolution has not been proven, thus it is a theory, a work in progress, with many flaws, such as carbon dating inaccuracies and the lack of a "missing link."

I am not going to debate evolution vs creationism, but I am going to state again that - neither one should be taught as fact in the science class of a public school exclusively.

I'm glad that for once my home state isn't the butt of these jokes :D

It's ironic that the same folks supporting us going overseas to set up secular governments where religious ones exist are often the same folks trying to establish a theocracy at home.

And you can try to muddy the waters by misapplying labels, as well - in fact, the 'theory' of creationism is not the same as the 'Theory' of evolution.

Evolution of humans is a theory in the purest sense because we cannot extend the time frame long enough to observe it as it happens. However, we CAN observe evolutionary behavior on a microscale. Human evolution occurs on a macroscale.

The process of 'proving' a theory is a dialectic procedure in which hypotheses are created, tested, and adapted. We have support for the hypotheses implicit in evolutionary behavior in humans. We can support these concepts by observing organisms with far shorter lifespans as they evolve, both under laboratory conditions and in the wild.

You are correct in the sense that theoretical science can never 'prove' evolution in the way that a math problem can be solved; rather, the hypotheses are changed constantly, each time getting closer to the truth.

That said, I see a few problems with teaching 'Creationism' in schools -

1 - Creationist sciences, for the vast majority of people, is Christian science. This means that, in order for legal teaching of Creationism, the Creation mythology for multiple religions and cultures would need to be taught. Church/state and all that - and I don't want to speak for you, Connie, but I would assume you simply want the story of Genesis told. This shouldn't fly.

2 - Creationist concepts differ strongly from evolutionary sciences in that there is NO SCIENTIFIC SUPPORT FOR CREATIONISM. Current legitimate science has found no support for the Genesis myth, but we have decades of support for evolution. Teaching them side-by-side, quite frankly, is unfair to Creationist theories - you'd be better off teaching your kids at home.

I also think you misunderstand the fundamental nature of adaptive evolution, as well - but that's for another time. The bottom line is that there is a scientific process to going about testing theories - Evolution follows that procedure. Creationism does not. They are not at all 'theories' in the same sense.

Ahem... your branch of the Christian faith, whereas my "branch" - Roman Catholic, is perfectly okay with Evolution.

So you would have me believe that the Earth (and the Universe for that matter) is only 6000 years old or so? What pray tell supports that "theory"? The dinosaurs or other extinct species aren't mentioned in the Bible... so were do they fit in to Creationism? Or for that matter were do the other Hominids fit in?


Lastly a a thought that an old and wise priest once shared when he was challenged about Creationism versus Evolution during a class on Human Evolution:

"How do you know that God is done making us in his image? and how do you know that Evolution isn't his medium? In the Evolution of the Modern Human species we came within a hairs breath of extinction in the face of global cataclysm, down to an estimated 2000 members of the entire race; the fact that we survived and indeed thrived is to me the greatest proof of the divine."

We just had our "evolution" trial in GA, and God lost again.

[hijack] One also has to realize that the Bible has been translated many, many times, and it is very difficult to translate word-for-word. Neither the Hebrew Scriptures or the Christian Scriptures were originally in English, so things can be lost in translation. A woman in a few of my classes a few years ago is very Christian and would get into debates with the prof, who is Jewish. The prof told her (and the rest of the class) that (for example) the Hebrew version of Genesis said that God took a side of Adam while in English, He took one of Adam's ribs. Now, I have not read Genesis in Hebrew, nor can I read Hebrew, so I wouldn't know. [/hijack]

Now, back to our regularly scheduled program

For anyone who doesn't understand the theory (regarded as fact) of evolution and believes they can discount it, I'd suggest taking a series of Bio courses.

It might clear things up; but only if your mind is open.

If you want your kids to learn creationism, take them to church or teach them at home. It's really simple.

As are most branches of Christianity. It's only that minority of Christians who think that the creation story in Genesis (well, the 2 slightly contradictory creation stories in Genesis) must be read literally that have the problem.

Many Christians understand quite well that science and Scripture are asking and answering two very different questions with regard to creation: Science asks "how" and "when" and Scripture asks "who" and "why."

One also has to understand that the Bible is written in a variety of literary forms, some of which can be read literally and some of which must be understood metaphorically or even poetically. This is true both of whole book and of specific verses, and part of the task is to tell how certain portions should be read and understood. For example, when Jesus said he was a door, a vine, a shepherd, light, etc., his words cannot be taken literally. He was speaking truthfully but certainly not factually.

Likewise, most Christians understand that the first chapters of Genesis can be Truthful without being necessarily factual.

FWIW, here's how I see it: I have no problem at all with any and all theories of how we came to be being taught. In fact, I would want ALL theories discussed as that, theories - Big Bang, Evolution, Creationism, Toaster Worship, whatever. I think it's rather limiting to a child to not teach ALL the options.

But if a parent has a particular theory that they want to espouse, they should say something to the effect that While the Big Bang theory sounds good, our family believes in Toaster Worship, and discuss the pros and cons with the child.

It's just like mythology - some private schools don't teach Greek or Roman mythology because they might been seen as promoting it, but later in life, it's beneficial to know the meaning behind having the Sword of Damacles over one's head, or opening a Pandora's box. It's enough a part of popular culture that studying literature without it is somewhat banal.

And if you have a particular agenda in mind, and can find a school that fits that agenda, for heaven's sake, send your child there!! I went to an ultra-liberal school district, and I very much doubt that even one person on GC would label me a liberal. Children will gravitate towards what they feel is right, and what they're taught at home - but having all of the options explained will only benefit them in the long run.

Exactly. If Toaster Worship is your thing, that's great, but I don't want my tax $$ being used to pay public schools to teach kids Toaster Worship -- or, for that matter, Creationism.

Why do some people think that Christian theories should be taught in public schools? That baffles me.

Well almost all schools in the Western wolrd teach general Christian theories , the problem comes about when people demand their own specific variety of Christian theory.


I don't get why this issue keeps coming up... I mean wans't it dealt with decades ago? Why doesn''t it seem to come up in other 'Christian' nations?

Is that true? What other Christian theories -- and specifically theories with no scientific basis -- are taught in public schools?

Are you asking about science classes only?

Adaptation is a part of Evolutionary Theory. Adaptation can be tested in a microscopic scale that goes from hypothesis, testing to conclusions and repetition of the results by more than one group. That is the business of Science. No one will believe you if only you can do the examination and get the result in Science.

God's Word is not what is being tested in evolution... Evolution has no words to be tested... It is just what occurs with repetition over cycles...

Yes, I agree, evolution is a work in progress which means, we scientists will always have an inquisitive minds with lifelong careers pursuing our very own questions for answers... Then as soon as we get one answer, then we have another question...

Whereas, in Christian Creationism, one is NOT allowed to questioned God's intent...

So why is killing, wrong? Animals do it everyday... And if you eat of the flesh, you are eating a killed animal--so isn't killing a sin? Can you reconcile that difference between the Spirit vs. living on Earth...

And stuffing down our throats that ONLY your beliefs are valid from your OWN perspective, God forbid you EVER suffer from ill will...

Hence, I will pray for you...

I understand what you are saying Honeychile, however, how do you teach a basic bonehead biology 101 to a group of young people without those stauch Christian religious conservatives entering the room telling you that: 1) Gene mutations are a manifestion of God's Intelligent Design for make better humans; 2) but meanwhile, you have a loved one dying of cancer due to massive mutations in their metastatic tumor cells...

Evolution as a theory is not what is at stake here. It is the introduction of a religion in a science class that is the problem...

How do we researchers begin to discuss basic chemistry that can be easily tested by various machines with predictability and repetition and then introduce a God that ordained that process to occur and why should we change it???

Same goes for physics and astronomy... It is NOT because we scientists added our own perception of what we imagine what happened, because if you are a "real scientist" there would be no shame to your game... It is because we have tested and re-tested it and this is what the results are and other folks have repeated the same tests and get the same results...

I mean, dayum, protons, electrons and neutrons are in atoms... These things can be measured and are readily...

Can God be measured by human hands?

I'm mainly interested in that but wouldn't mind hearing about other classes as well. I've been out of school for a long time so I can't say I know much about what kids are being taught these days.

plain and simple, evolution and creationism are both theories. fine if you want to teach them both, but not in the same class or context. evolution is a scientific theory, creationism is a religious theory.

i'm all for having kids take religious theory classes that discuss theories of all religions so they can be better informed and to perhaps iradicate some of the stereotypes and misconceptions of people of certain religions that seem to be rampant these days.

but the idea of teaching biblical passages in a science class is just weird to me. i can't remember ever having been taught any sort of theory on the beginning of the earth in any level of schooling, so i guess Texas' current policy is to ignore it all together.

So you would have me believe that the Earth (and the Universe for that matter) is only 6000 years old or so? What pray tell supports that "theory"? The dinosaurs or other extinct species aren't mentioned in the Bible

Job 40:15 - Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.

Isaiah 27:1 - In that day the LORD with his sore and great and strong sword shall punish leviathan the piercing serpent, even leviathan that crooked serpent; and he shall slay the dragon that is in the sea.

(RACOOPER) Dinosaurs are mentioned in the bible.

What pray tell supports that "theory"?
(I was gonna cut and paste but this was easier.) http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/4005.asp

Again I just want evolution to be taught as a theory, not fact.

I am not going to take on the scientific GC community because well obviously I don't know EVERYTHING. I just don't want my tax dollars to pay for children to be taught "theory" as fact. And, just to make things clear, I don't want religion taught to children at public schools, in science classes, either because, I wouldn't want some Church of Christ teacher to teach a Baptist student their religious beliefs. (nothing against Church of Christ - I just used them as an example)

Ah but the Bible only refers to one "dinosaur" in the form of Levuathan...



Where as this site uses the approach that the lack of evidence of our ancestorial remains is proof that evolution is wrong (incomplete mayb, but flawed no). Creationists are willing to use lack of proof as a an arguement to support themselves, yet are unwilling to accept ample proof that they are wrong.

As for the website itself - even if the challenging of geological, astronimical, and anthropological dates where backed up with concrete and broad support - the dates and "facts" refute the Creationist arguements for a literal interpretation of the Bible.

So where does one start to teach "BASIC CONCEPTS" in science classes that must be KNOWN to go further to build a foundation...

For example: There are 2 hydrogens that ionically bind to one oxygen to form a water molecule. Many water molecules are visible in 3 forms: gas, liquid, solid. The amount of water in any form is a determination of "MASS". Mass is the atomic number given to an atom as a measure of atomic mass units. The more you increase amu's you reach the number of moles. Moles is measured in terms of Avogadro's number: 6.0233 X 10^-23...

These are time tested proven facts and theorems with mathematical calculations that transcend into the deep recesses of the Universe...

A water molecule will "look" the same if it is 1 million light years away verses 1 second away... Either way, it is STILL a water molecule...

The scientists determine these kinds of things with machines. There are several ways of doing it, but usually they use either a mass spectra analysis or nuclear magnetic resonance...

And that is how science is built... One step at a time...

Why H2O is the way it is is not a question that scientists try to answer because to us, it is irrelevant to us--water is there, why it is there is a better question to us that we like to answer... And how did some bacteria evolved a "way" to "nucleate water" to make ice is more interesting to us even moreso...

But why H2O has to be water--that is something that the religious right can ponder...

You are arguing epistemology... Look that word up and go from there...

Well modern 'western' society is based upon Christian principles and theories of morals, ethics, and society - so any of the social sciences are bound to touch upon general Christian theories.

I understand what you're saying, too. I suppose I'm saying what I was taught in school - here are ALL the theories, take your pick. I would challenge these boneheaded children to consider, if they want to believe in God or Toast Worship, who or what created those atoms, protons, neutrons, etc, and why He or It gave us the ability to think, to use wisdom to change the wrongs of the world.

Quote:

Can God be measured by human hands?

Of course not! That's what makes Him God, and we His creations!

I am not arguing anything I am just stating for the last time. Public schools should not teach "theory" (or opinion) as FACT.
Public schools should not teach the "theory of evolution" as a scientific fact. The End.

AKA_Monet we all get it you are a scientist or a scientist wannabe. This thread does not lead me to "argue" with you about evolution. You have the right to believe what ever you want to believe, and study whatever you want to study. I respect your right to flex your scientific muscles on GC however you are arguing with yourself about, God knows what, when I was making a statement about how public schools shouldn't teach scientific theory vs scientific fact.

There is a particular religious university located in my city that will not hire biology professors who believe in evolution.

I think this is partly hilarious and partly sad. I was taught in Catholic grade school that evolution was set in process by God, and I was taught in public school that the most popular school of thought regarding humans was that of evolution. My parents taught me the blend I was taught in Catholic schools.

My boyfriend is a pretty staunch creationist but he never had any education on evolution so I don't think he knows any better. ;) We just agree to disagree on this issue.

[slight hijack] What is Toast[er] Worship? I'd look it up but I'm lazy and tired. :) [/sh]

I went to both public and private school. I was primarily taught Big Bang/Evolutionary theories up through high school. And then in my theology classes, I learned about Creationism. Best of both I suppose. Of course, my first high school history book had "Jesus Christ" as a key term.

And I'd recommend a good anthopology class to anyone. If anything, you get to study monkeys. :)

I was using the term as a catch-all phrase for worshipping or believing any theory which you wanted to believe. I only know of one Toaster Worshipper, and he's a few fries short of a Happy Meal.

I just came up with some important questions about Creationism... if it is taught as a valid theory are kids going to have to learn the sky is realy a dome with water above it? That the stars are just lights in this dome? The womam was created as a servant for man? or where did Cain's wife come from - was she his sister?

I'm going back to sixth-seventh grade for this, but the way I remember it, the teacher proposed several different theories of how the earth came to be. He mentioned that most of us were probably familiar with Creationism, then told us a little about it. Then Evolution, with an explanation. Then some of the more "out there" theories - the only one I can think of right now is that our world could be simply an atom on the big toe of a huge being who lived on another planet. Just the presentations of all theories.

No "this is right, this is wrong", no judgments at all. But then again, most of my pre-college education was non-judgmental and "make it your own" (we were never allowed to quote anything verbatim).

And again, I went to public school, an ultra-liberal one which was a pilot school for the state - no parochial school education whatsoever.

I'm just curious, but if you're a Christian who thinks the "theory of creationism" should be taught in public schools, would you be okay with public schools teaching about karma and rebirth? Let's say we call karma a theory, a fancy way of saying "cause and effect" -- is that cool?

Connie, you should read my above post, where I explain to you why, in science, sometimes 'theory' becomes approximated as 'fact', and why that's not only a good thing, but a necessary thing.

I don't mean to insult or intrude on your beliefs, but I do think you're not as well-grounded in science as some of us, and these concepts are not exactly intuitive without that grounding.


This is EXACTLY the point I was trying to get at before - should we include stories from Buddhist or Hindu texts, for completeness? I get the distinct feeling people only want Genesis, which feels wrong to my simple mind.

We do teach about karma, in world history, but not as fact. I also remember hearing about many different types of creation stories, including genesis, in literature classes. It's a complicated issue, I don' tknow that there is a right answer for everyone, because your point is exactly right valkyrie, in the sense that I dont' want every crazy theory known to man taught to my children as fact.

For example: A big issue is prayer in schools. I am a Christian and don't think that it should be allowed because I don't want a toaster worshipper leading my child in some butter and jelly prayer to the knife god. I dont' want a Satan worshipper teacher telling my kid about their religion. This was part of my point in character education....I don't want a teacher telling my children that accepting certain lifestyles or behaviors are ok. I am one that will probably send my kids to private school so I won't have to worry about this issue. NO I don't think Creationism should be taught in schools, but I don't like the other theories either. Maybe they can just skip that part of science class. :confused:

I don't know of any schools that are teaching "opinion" as fact; they are teaching evolution as "scientific theory," which is not the same as "opinion."

Part of the problem in the evolution vs. creationism/intelligent design battle is that many creationism/intelligent design proponents either do not know, or are exploiting the fact that their followers do not know, the meaning of "theory" in a scientific context, as KSig RC has pointed out.

In general usage, "theory" does mean "conjecture." In science, however, it doesn't. (Nor does it in music either, for that matter. ;) ) In science, a "theory" is a generalization based on repeated observations and experiments. A scientific theory is a well-tested (and re-tested and re-re-tested), verified hypothesis that takes existing data and explains how processes or events are thought to occur. A scientific theory is based on overwhelming evidence in support of a general principle explaining the operation of certain phenomena or events that take place in the world. Theories can be modified as new information is gained.

The bottom line is that the existence of God cannot be subjected to scientific principles of testing, either to be proved or disproved (Dan Brown in "Angels and Demons" notwithstanding). "We walk by faith and not by sight." Thus, creationism and intelligent design cannot be proven scientifically. While I'm quite in agreement with the crux of intelligent design -- that the universe as a whole and life on earth in particular are simply too complex and precarious to have happened by chance, without a creator -- I don't see how that can be proven scientifically. Therefore, if ID is going to be taught, it should be taught as philosophy or theology, not as science.

Let science do what it is designed to do: answer "how" and "when" questions. The "who" and "why" certainly should be asked as well, but not in science class.

Yes -- this is exactly why I think these things should not be taught in pubic schools. You might think "karma" or whatever else is a crazy theory, but I think "god" is a crazy theory. That's why I think it's best for public schools to, as much as possible, stay away from anything that's blatantly religious.