God vs. Science: The Inclusion of Creationism in School Textbooks?

Started by Draco6937 pagesPoll

God vs. Science: The Inclusion of Creationism in School Textbooks?

God vs. Science: The Inclusion of Creationism in School Textbooks?

Hoping to avoid a bitter public showdown, defenders of the theory of evolution boycotted the first of four days of hearings Thursday over the science curriculum in Kansas, where members of the state Board of Education critical of the standard theory are considering changes to give more weight to creationist ideas.

Mainstream science organizations spurned invitations to participate, dismissing the hearings in Topeka as an effort “to attack and undermine science,” in the view of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, which publishes the journal Science.

As a result, the only witnesses heard Thursday were advocates of a philosophy called “intelligent design,” critics of evolution or both. Pedro Irigonegaray, a Topeka lawyer representing what he called mainstream science, dismissed the event as a “kangaroo court.”

Spreading across the nation
The hearings, which run through Saturday and resume May 12, resemble a trial, as three school board members hear arguments from champions of both sides. The panelists — all three of them conservative Republicans who have questioned evolution — will report to the full school board, which is expected to approve new science standards next month.

Defenders of Charles Darwin’s theory of natural selection acknowledged that their boycott leaves opponents of evolution unchallenged, but they said they hoped to defuse the publicity that a media-saturated argument over science and the Bible could stir up.

Nonetheless, a showdown is inevitable. Efforts to compel schools to teach or, at least, give equal time to the purported errors of evolution are under way in nearly two dozen states, led by two groups of activists united by their belief in a supreme being who set history in motion.

One group is made up of religious conservatives who espouse the traditional biblical account in which God created the world in six days. The Supreme Court, however, barred the teaching of creationism in a 1987 decision striking down a Louisiana law that said evolution could be taught only if “creation science” was also taught. So today, the movement has shifted to the campaign by intellectual thinkers, some of them scientists, who argue that life on the planet is too complex to have come about by without some sort of guiding intelligence.

That supposition is called “intelligent design.” Its leaders say that as a matter of science their principles are not religious, but mainstream scientists have labeled them Creationism Lite, and Christian activists have latched onto them as an alternative stick with which to whack Darwin.

Publishers call the tune
For mainstream scientists, the Kansas debate is just a skirmish. The real battles will come in the next few years as schools adopt new textbooks.

Intelligent design campaigns are being pursued in California and Texas. Their school boards have long dictated the content of many of the nation’s textbooks because of the clout they have with publishers owing to their enormous student populations. Publishers routinely tailor their textbooks to the tastes of review boards in those states to avoid the devastating prospect that a multimillion-dollar new edition could be rejected.

“They call the tune, and the publishers dance,” Diane Ravitch, an assistant education secretary in the administration of former President George H.W. Bush, testified before Congress two years ago.

Ravitch’s testimony came as Texas was going through a wrenching review of its biology texts; those books were introduced into Texas classrooms this year. Mainstream scientists fought off major concessions on evolution this time, but the battle is being continued in the Legislature, where a bill is under consideration that would give the state Board of Education — which is dominated by Republican social conservatives — even more control over the content of texts.

In California, meanwhile, a case awaits in U.S. District Court filed by parents who claim that they were denied their civil rights when a school district near Sacramento rejected their proposal that schools should be required to teach the purported flaws of evolution.

While California’s textbook battles have usually been fought by groups pushing more traditionally liberal causes, such as gender equality and multicultural history, the lawsuit signals that the evolution dispute is likely to become a hot-button issue there, as well — just in time to begin picking up steam ahead of next year’s acceptance of bids for new science textbooks.

Too much to read but I think it should be told aboot creationism from an objective standpoint

Just scan the article. You don't have to read it all. Useful in college.

I think both should be taught. Children should be exposed to all theories and allowed to decide which one they find more credible.

It should be like that for everything.

Heh. Finally, some proper legal action to eject the theory of evolution from the field of true science. I could go on and on about this, but I think I'll hold my tongue until the evolutionists vehemently rise up over this.

This is really bad in one way, and really good in another.

All the jesus freak teachers will be biased, and so will some of the non-believers. And that's just f*cked up.

Personally, I don't believe ANYTHING in creationism in any way, shape, or form, but do think that non-biased teaching of both would be okay. Just make sure they present all the evidence for both.

True science? What part of evolution isn't science?

sure the theory of evolution ain't perfect but it makes more sense to me than Creationism

This is simple.

Evolutioin meets the definition of Science.

Creaitonism only meets the definition of faith.

You CANNOT equate them, and they cannot be taught equally. One is a matter for science classes. The other is matter for religious education.

If you are trying to teach these simply as two interpretations of the same area, you are simply setting back the progress of humanity to a time without rationality.

It absolutley must not be done.

Intelligent design is, at this point, lacking in anything approaching suffiicent back-up to be taught alongside evolution theory in general. Save that kind of thing for Uni.

Go ahead and teach both.. people are gonna believe what they want regardless.

You cannot teach Creationism in a science lesson. It isn't science.

I was actually quite shocked at the replies to this.

Creationism and evolution cannot be compared to be the same thing. There is no evidence for creationism, it is based wholly on faith, and what about the people who do not believe that religion? Evolution is a scientific theory with loads of evidence for it. SCIENCE should be taught in science textbooks. Creationism does NOT fall in the realm of science by any stretch of the imagination. Keep creationism to being taught in a class about religion.

How could u possibly teach creationism in schools? What would a teacher say? "Ok well God created everything, we dont really know how or why but he did, honest". However it could create a really good debating topic amongst teenagers in schools, but at the same time could also divide a school.

I think if a pupil wishes to learn about creationism and religion then he/she should be able to. It should be a choice given to every pupil in every school, which it is in Scotland.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
You cannot teach Creationism in a science lesson. It isn't science.
Yeah that's true. Ok scratch that, don't teach both, unless the school has some sort of "bible study" or whatever.

It is wrong for teachers to leave out Creation and just say it is Eleavetion we were not created by no one just informed into monkeys to humans for no reason.
Science is stupid if we were taught like that.JM

Obviously you do not understand the first thing about the evolution theory.

Evolution isn't the only scientific theory to describe how life advanced though, there are several other evolution is just the most credible one. I remember we learned about like 4 different theories in my biology class, it's just the other theories were a little "out there."

The point is, there is only one reason that Creationism is not taught in science class. It is not because of some odd agenda by scientists to disallow free speech or cast down religious types. There is no conspiracy here.

It is simply because it does not meet the definition of Science. Start teaching non-science in science classes and you start to undermine the edifice of education.

Other alternatives that DO meet such a definition are perfectly valid to be taught, of course.

Originally posted by Jackie Malfoy
It is wrong for teachers to leave out Creation and just say it is Eleavetion we were not created by no one just informed into monkeys to humans for no reason.
Science is stupid if we were taught like that.JM

As usual, your post made no sense and showed that you didn't read anything in this thread and have no understanding of the topic.

Monkeys did NOT turn into humans! What is so hard about that to understand? Apes and humans have a common ancestor. At one point in history part of a population of this common ancestor became seperated from the rest of the species, and over a very long period of time evolved into what are now humans, while the rest evolved into all the various modern species of primates. PLEASE use some common sense before spouting random crap.

Creationism is not taught because it is not science, has no factual basis, and has nothing in the way of evidence to back it up. It is based purely in faith.

Originally posted by Afro Cheese
Evolution isn't the only scientific theory to describe how life advanced though, there are several other evolution is just the most credible one. I remember we learned about like 4 different theories in my biology class, it's just the other theories were a little "out there."

There are others, yes, evolution is just the most credible, well-known one. I remember reading about others too, but I can't remember what they are now.

I think the problem is that if we teach Christian Creationism what would stop us from teaching Islam, Hinduism or Jewish Creationism?

Or Star Wars Creationism?

"Failed the Force theory exam, you have Michael!"