If you are going to flame..
fuck you.
Also please read it all before replying and read it carefully.
My paper...
CREATIONISM
Should it be taught in school?
"Creationism is the doctrine that matter and all things were created, substantially as they now exist, by an omnipotent Creator, and not gradually evolved or developed."
"Evolution is the continuous genetic adaptation of organisms or species to the environment by the integrating agencies of selection, hybridization, inbreeding, and mutation."
Since a scientific theory, by definition, must be testable by repeatable observations and must be capable of being falsified if indeed it were false, a scientific theory can only attempt to explain processes and events that are presently occurring repeatedly within our observations. In the domain of "Empirical Science", creation scientist operate in the same manner as evolution scientist, because science is empirical it is the only way a scientist can operate.
No one was alive for the creation of man, nor to see the first living thing, nor witness the evolution of the ape. It is a unique single event that happened only once in history. You can not perform a test in a laboratory to see if an ape evolves into a human, or a reptile change into an amphibian. Thus, evolution and creationism are not scientific theories, instead they are inferences based on circumstantial evidence.
Karl Popper, Birch and Ehlrich, Green and Goldberger, even Futuyama, one of those who has recently, written a book attempting to refute creation, all state that Evolution IS NOT a scientific theory. It is evident that the major CHALLENGE to the status that Evolution is a scientific theory, is from the Evolution establishment, and not from Creationism.
It is absolutely absurd, to say that creation scientists are seeking to introduce biblical creation into public schools. Their intent is that the subject of origins be taught in a philosophically and religiously neutral manner, as required by the U.S. Constitution.
Evolution and Creationism is two irreconcilable world views, both are based off assertions that are assumed to be true and which have predictable consequences. No professionally trained teacher should thus hesitate to teach the scientific evidence that supports creation as an alternative to evolution because not only is it worth mentioning, but a comparison of two alternatives can be an excellent exercise in logic and reason. Primary goal as an educator is to teach students to think right? If it is, how is a student to think with only one presentable option for students to chose. Is that a choice? It is like a multiple choice answer, with only one choice. Or a survey with one response to chose from.
Thus, since creation is as scientific as evolution, and evolution is as religious as creation; since creation and evolution between them exhaust the possible explanations for origins; a comparison of the two alternatives can be an excellent exercise in logic and reason; no theory in science should be allowed to freeze into dogma, immune from the challenge of alternative theories; academic and religious freedoms are guaranteed by the United States constitution; public schools are supported by the taxes derived from all citizens; therefore in the public schools in USA, the scientific evidence which supports creation should be taught along with the scientific evidences which support evolution in a philosophically neutral manner, devoid of references to any religious literature.
fuck you.
Also please read it all before replying and read it carefully.
My paper...
CREATIONISM
Should it be taught in school?
"Creationism is the doctrine that matter and all things were created, substantially as they now exist, by an omnipotent Creator, and not gradually evolved or developed."
"Evolution is the continuous genetic adaptation of organisms or species to the environment by the integrating agencies of selection, hybridization, inbreeding, and mutation."
Since a scientific theory, by definition, must be testable by repeatable observations and must be capable of being falsified if indeed it were false, a scientific theory can only attempt to explain processes and events that are presently occurring repeatedly within our observations. In the domain of "Empirical Science", creation scientist operate in the same manner as evolution scientist, because science is empirical it is the only way a scientist can operate.
No one was alive for the creation of man, nor to see the first living thing, nor witness the evolution of the ape. It is a unique single event that happened only once in history. You can not perform a test in a laboratory to see if an ape evolves into a human, or a reptile change into an amphibian. Thus, evolution and creationism are not scientific theories, instead they are inferences based on circumstantial evidence.
Karl Popper, Birch and Ehlrich, Green and Goldberger, even Futuyama, one of those who has recently, written a book attempting to refute creation, all state that Evolution IS NOT a scientific theory. It is evident that the major CHALLENGE to the status that Evolution is a scientific theory, is from the Evolution establishment, and not from Creationism.
It is absolutely absurd, to say that creation scientists are seeking to introduce biblical creation into public schools. Their intent is that the subject of origins be taught in a philosophically and religiously neutral manner, as required by the U.S. Constitution.
Evolution and Creationism is two irreconcilable world views, both are based off assertions that are assumed to be true and which have predictable consequences. No professionally trained teacher should thus hesitate to teach the scientific evidence that supports creation as an alternative to evolution because not only is it worth mentioning, but a comparison of two alternatives can be an excellent exercise in logic and reason. Primary goal as an educator is to teach students to think right? If it is, how is a student to think with only one presentable option for students to chose. Is that a choice? It is like a multiple choice answer, with only one choice. Or a survey with one response to chose from.
Thus, since creation is as scientific as evolution, and evolution is as religious as creation; since creation and evolution between them exhaust the possible explanations for origins; a comparison of the two alternatives can be an excellent exercise in logic and reason; no theory in science should be allowed to freeze into dogma, immune from the challenge of alternative theories; academic and religious freedoms are guaranteed by the United States constitution; public schools are supported by the taxes derived from all citizens; therefore in the public schools in USA, the scientific evidence which supports creation should be taught along with the scientific evidences which support evolution in a philosophically neutral manner, devoid of references to any religious literature.
my point exactly... creation is no more credible than any of them, just more popular