Creationism does not belong in Science class

This is why those of you Christians who whine about how persecuted you are sound like such loons. Attacking a small group of idiots who think a completely unscientific theory should be taught in science class is not the same as saying “all Christians are idiots”. I imagine what sparked this was a report of another small group of idiots trying to push for their bullshit to become part of the curriculum - it’s not like it’s such a rare occurrence.

If you’re finished being defensive, tell me: do you think creationism should be taught in science classes?

Holy crap, the first (only) comment on that story was a veritable orgy of misconceptions! I actually had no idea these nutters were so prominent in the UK.

Well, if the absurd scenario described in the OP somehow actually happened, I think we can probably all agree it would be a Bad Thing. You’re clever, and funny, and on the right side of things, and we all agree with you.

You’ll find precious few people on the SDMB who think Creationism should be taught in school.

Anything else? Like a point?

Actually, creationism is cartoonish.

And straight out of the fundamentalist dictionary.

What I’d like to know is why the hell there’s a shot of hands with rosary beads-the Catholic church does not endorse teaching ID in schools. (I was taught that God set Evolution in place, but no, RCism is NOT anti-Darwin!)

So, fundamentalists of all flavours agree upon that then? That seems a good enough starting point for some sort of consensus. If they could get round a table and hammer out their other differences, the world might be a happier place.

The comments section of the Daily Mail website isn’t exactly prominent.

In my tiny Texas high school Biology class, our teacher addressed creationism. I believe it was something like this:

“Some people believe a Divine Power created all life on Earth. Other people believe that this Divine Power set the wheels in motion and started evolution at the beginning. Most reputable scientists do work with the theory of evolution, even if it isn’t the only theory out there. This course is meant to discuss that theory. Now, do y’all remember the differences among theories, hypotheses, and laws? That’s right – a hypothesis is an idea, a theory is a tested idea that seems to hold up, and a law is a theory tested to the point of universally accepted fact. So: with the best-observed evidence we have pointing toward evolution as truth, that’s what we’re studying. If you are interested in the debate, I encourage you to educate yourselves.”

This was the same school system that, in our Earth Sciences course in the 8th grade, showed a video on the dangers of Satanism. The main outcry was “this is a scary video!” Also, at the annual DARE conferences, local Concerned Citizens had classes on how to combat cultish activities. Ankhs and pentacles are evil, boys and girls. (I had great fun correcting the teacher in that little ‘class’. He did not like me by the end. I was informed that if I continued interrupting his teaching I would be asked to leave and would not receive credit. I busied myself by giggling and explaining the REAL meanings of the symbols to people after the class was over.)

Did I say it should? Now glee has deigned to provide some context for the OP, but putting it in the OP would have been better. As for science class, a scientist would find out what it was that “sparked this” - not drag out a bunch of random assumptions. If you bother to actually check the link, you’ll find out that it’s more along the lines of a noted scientist taking the line that there might be better approaches than pointing and laughing - and the evolutionists have closed ranks to hound him out of his position of responsibility. None of which has a fucking thing to do with American classrooms.

Graham, Graham… you can own my sorry butt over the chessboard any time you like, and you make a fair-to-average Wose, DM or Viking berserker, but you can’t debate religion for shit. :stuck_out_tongue:

I rather suck at constructing posts. There should have been some reference to the fact that

But, as stated, I could have been clearer.

Ah, gotcha. Those campaigners are very fringe though, even within the religious community in the UK.

I felt compelled to respond to the single (?!) comment.

The section is pre-moderated, though.

Teach the controversy!

Jeez, Jerry must have screwed up royally this time. I thought I was opening a Pit thread. Instead I wound up on the livejournal of a 15 year old, thinks he’s more clever that Alexander Pope and Jonathan Swift’s love-child, know-it-all. Hyperbole and satire are dangerous weapons, kid, and should be left to the professionals.

Now where’s my FAIL icon?

Actually, I think creationism DOES belong in the science classroom.

We learned about the Phlogiston hypothesis in basic science, the four humours theory in human biology and the four elements in chemistry.

The science classroom is the perfect context for explaining defunct or discarded notions of how the universe works.


What’s this “alinsarahp”, then? Is that some newfangled scientific notion?

You only have to say it three times, while facing a mirror.

So, that’s one vote “for,” then?