Join TSR now to have your say on this topicSign up now

Creationism being taught in schools is a not all bad

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Surely children should be exposed to a plethora of ideas and allowed to choose from the wealth of knowledge which is being imparted on them daily and make their own choice. The occupation of Darwinian evolution in the class room is pretty one sided and it's indoctrinating children to having a very narrow outlook on life.

    Research has shown that the most intelligent students and academically well to-do choose their careers around the early age of 10 where children show a strong interest and passion for one area or more over others. Yet children are not being stimulated enough in primary school. We need to make certain elements of the curriculum more stream-lined across the whole country for example more advanced arithmetic than is being currently taught in addition to stressing the need to read books for leisure. And why not also educate children on philosophy and creationism.

    Surely children should be set-up to have a well-rounded school experience not what is currently happening right now.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    um i had RE lessons like 5 times a fortnight telling us what christianity/buddhism think of the world
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    young earth creationism? Not really - can't see why your hobby horse should be privileged over all the other wrong ideas ever conceived during human history.

    I don't think there's enough time to teach school children every wrong idea ever conceived as well as the right ones - and probably teaching them that everything's equally valid so they can just choose what they want to believe isn't really serving them well.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ihatePE)
    um i had RE lessons like 5 times a fortnight telling us what christianity/buddhism think of the world
    R.E is a joke. The subject should be scrapped.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Galadrielll)
    Surely children should be exposed to a plethora of ideas and allowed to choose from the wealth of knowledge which is being imparted on them daily and make their own choice. The occupation of Darwinian evolution in the class room is pretty one sided and it's indoctrinating children to having a very narrow outlook on life.
    Err no it should not be presented as a viable alternative to mainstream Christian beliefs.

    Creationism is beyond a joke. It is not something I'd want in schools. It's like asking Flat Earth theory to be taught in Science. No. Stop it.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Galadrielll)
    R.E is a joke. The subject should be scrapped.
    and creationism should not be introduced, but that's just my opinion
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Joinedup)
    young earth creationism? Not really - can't see why your hobby horse should be privileged over all the other wrong ideas ever conceived during human history.

    I don't think there's enough time to teach school children every wrong idea ever conceived as well as the right ones - and probably teaching them that everything's equally valid so they can just choose what they want to believe isn't really serving them well.

    Many scientists support creationism and in fact lots of the evidence for evolution supports creationism in some cases more so than evolution itself. Take the lack of transitional fossils for example. If all life forms have evolved from simpler life forms there should be millions of transitional fossils available for study. These transitional fossils would be of the type showing the process of one species evolving into another. However, no transitional fossils have ever been found. As such the fossil record actually lines up better with supernatural creation than with macroevolution.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Galadrielll)
    Many scientists support creationism and in fact lots of the evidence for evolution supports creationism in some cases more so than evolution itself. Take the lack of transitional fossils for example. If all life forms have evolved from simpler life forms there should be millions of transitional fossils available for study. These transitional fossils would be of the type showing the process of one species evolving into another. However, no transitional fossils have ever been found. As such the fossil record actually lines up better with supernatural creation than with macroevolution.
    No reputable scientist that has multiple, peer-reviewed (by the academic community) papers on the topic exist.The only thing you'd be able to do is link me to CMI or some other biased website with so called 'published papers'

    (Original post by Galadrielll)
    As such the fossil record actually lines up better with supernatural creation than with macroevolution.
    It is literally beyond me how you came to that conclusion.

    I haven't studied Geology to a massively high level, especially fossils. Plagioclase would know better.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    No, there is zero evidence for Creationism, it is a load of baloney and it should not be taught in schools.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hezzlington)
    Err no it should not be presented as a viable alternative to mainstream Christian beliefs.

    Creationism is beyond a joke. It is not something I'd want in schools. It's like asking Flat Earth theory to be taught in Science. No. Stop it.
    Creationism has more evidence than Flat Earth but nice try at demonstrating the Pooh-pooh fallacy.
    The fossil records I mentioned which you failed to comment for obvious reasons has massive holes in it and I'm not even talking about the missing links which at this point are a massive, gaping missing chain but I digress.

    Evolution relies on the idea that things can improve and eventually become more complex. However, what we observe in the real world is that everything runs down or becomes less complex - entropy. Are you familiar with the laws of thermodynamics. For evolution to work organisms would improve always and become more complex. We do not see this in observable science.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Yeah sure and let's teach Astrology as well, considering we're just gonna be shoving ******** down kid's throats either way.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Galadrielll)
    Many scientists support creationism
    Not as a scientific theory they don't.

    (Original post by Galadrielll)
    However, no transitional fossils have ever been found. As such the fossil record actually lines up better with supernatural creation than with macroevolution.
    This is absolutely, completely untrue. There's even a wikipedia article on this listing some of the key transitional fossils that have been uncovered. The fossil record is extremely patchy, sure, but to claim that there are no examples of transitional fossils is just a lie. And to go on to claim that the fossil record supports supernatural creation is even more absurd! A good scientific hypothesis has to (1) propose a mechanism and (2) make testable predictions that stand up to evidence. Creationism does neither of these. Natural selection does both.

    (Original post by Galadrielll)
    Are you familiar with the laws of thermodynamics. For evolution to work organisms would improve always and become more complex. We do not see this in observable science.
    This is one of the most irritating counter-evolutionary arguments in existence. In order to claim that evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics you have to completely misunderstand what the second law of thermodynamics says. There's nothing about evolution that means organisms have to always become more complex, that's just absolutely not true. The second law of thermodynamics also does not say that all systems have to become more complex over time. It says that the entropy of an isolated system increases over time. Entropy is not complexity and genetic lineages are not isolated systems.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I dont see the point as there are sunday schools anyway.

    Also i think the GCSE RE i was taught was okay we basically learnt about what others think, nothing was shoved down and it was stuff like (life,death, reasons for and against god, family stuff like divorce, homosexuality views,then stuff like recycling,genetic engineering etc.)

    Cant remember primary school year 1 and 2
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Galadrielll)
    Creationism has more evidence than Flat Earth but nice try at demonstrating the Pooh-pooh fallacy.
    The fossil records I mentioned which you failed to comment for obvious reasons has massive holes in it and I'm not even talking about the missing links which at this point are a massive, gaping missing chain but I digress.
    Well, I guess you can call it a Pooh-pooh fallacy. But to be fair, they don't really deserve attention. It demonstrates an utter failure of our education system where we have people believing in Young-Earth Creationism and Flat Earth 'Theory'.

    (Original post by Galadrielll)
    Evolution relies on the idea that things can improve and eventually become more complex. However, what we observe in the real world is that everything runs down or becomes less complex - entropy.
    Such as what?

    (Original post by Galadrielll)
    Are you familiar with the laws of thermodynamics.
    Yes, are you?


    (Original post by Galadrielll)
    For evolution to work organisms would improve always and become more complex. We do not see this in observable science.
    You're aware of the timescales involved, right?
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Galadrielll)
    R.E is a joke. The subject should be scrapped.
    Its an easy A and an easy A* if you dont leave everything till the last min like i did
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I went to a catholic school. We were taught about the Big Bang Theory and Steady State for Science. In RS we weren't taught very much about the Big Bang Theory or Steady state. In the RS textbook it just said the theory states that about 13.7 billion years ago all the matter in the Universe was concentrated into a single incredibly tiny point. This began to enlarge rapidly in a hot explosion, and it is still expanding today. That's all that that was in the textbook.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Galadrielll)
    x
    (Original post by Plagioclase)
    x

    I eagerly await your response to Plag. I wonder if you'll address any of the points he makes...
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Creationism should be taught in schools as an example of one of the beliefs of a minority of Christians. It is important that young people are aware of fringe viewpoints. The place for this aspect of it is in RE lessons.

    It should also be used as an example in Science lessons to help better understand modern scientific methods, and the various meanings if the word 'thoery'.

    If young people want to believe in Creationism or vampires or Judgement Day then so be it. But there are enough plausible things in this world for them to explore without us oushing them towards fairytales without even a decent moral to the story.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Galadrielll)
    Creationism has more evidence than Flat Earth but nice try at demonstrating the Pooh-pooh fallacy.
    The fossil records I mentioned which you failed to comment for obvious reasons has massive holes in it and I'm not even talking about the missing links which at this point are a massive, gaping missing chain but I digress.

    Evolution relies on the idea that things can improve and eventually become more complex. However, what we observe in the real world is that everything runs down or becomes less complex - entropy. Are you familiar with the laws of thermodynamics. For evolution to work organisms would improve always and become more complex. We do not see this in observable science.
    Yet creationists like science when they think they can get away with misrepresenting it to gain some backup.

    I would suggest that you are not familiar with the laws of thermodynamics... if you're doing it properly at all you've got to be careful about defining your closed system. you can't just cherry pick something evolving as if it occurred in isolation and say it's violating thermodynamics.
    see #9 here http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...o-creationist/
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by offhegoes)
    Creationism should be taught in schools as an example of one of the beliefs of a minority of Christians. It is important that young people are aware of fringe viewpoints. The place for this aspect of it is in RE lessons.
    No. Use something like Quakers or Rastafarianism for that.

    (Original post by offhegoes)
    It should also be used as an example in Science lessons to help better understand modern scientific methods, and the various meanings if the word 'thoery'.
    No. Use the theory of gravity or BBT to help understand what theory means.

    (Original post by offhegoes)
    If young people want to believe in Creationism or vampires or Judgement Day then so be it. But there are enough plausible things in this world for them to explore without us oushing them towards fairytales without even a decent moral to the story.
    No. These same young people can eventually vote. It's in our best interest as a society to keep everybody well educated and to be able to think rationally. If you want to demonstrate that stupid people exist in society...then maybe..sure.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you have exam superstitions?
Useful resources
Uni match

Applying to uni?

Our tool will help you find the perfect course

Articles:

Debate and current affairs guidelinesDebate and current affairs wiki

Quick link:

Educational debate unanswered threads

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.