# Creationism vs. evolution **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 1, 2004, 5:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism-vs-evolution/237673 "2004-04-01T05:17:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![iamme99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/57b2e6/32.png) [@iamme99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamme99)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 5:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism-vs-evolution/237673/1 "2004-04-01T05:17:47Z")
A very Interesting article below. \*\*The question for debate is - since creationism is really a religious belief and is not backed by any science or factual evidence, why should it be considered as valid to be taught in public schools? Aren’t those who “believe” in creationism essentially trying to impose their beliefs on others at the expense of the doctrine of separation of government and religion? \*\* > [@](#): > > Evolution education down to a science on Web > UC Berkeley experts offer advice on facing ‘pitfalls’ > David Perlman, Chronicle Science Editor > Monday, March 29, 2004 > SF Chronicle > > As controversies simmer across the country over teaching evolution, scientists at UC Berkeley are taking the offensive against the modern-day foes of Charles Darwin. > > Experts at the university’s Museum of Paleontology have created a new Web site designed to offer beleaguered classroom teachers support and guidance through the often slippery attacks they can encounter teaching natural selection and other concepts. > > The site, at evolution.berkeley.edu, grew out of a conference that the museum hosted four years ago at which representatives from virtually every national scientific and education organization gathered to consider the growing pressures against evolution curricula. > > “We realized we really needed to put new resources into teachers’ hands, and that’s how the idea of using the Internet emerged,” said David Lindberg, chairman of Berkeley’s Department of Integrative Biology and former director of the paleontology museum. > > The Web site was developed with a $460,000, three-year grant from the National Science Foundation, and its creators have another $380,000 grant – this time from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute – to develop a version for the general public and another for students. > > Full article [UC Berkeley evolution site referenced in above article](http://evolution.berkeley.edu/) ---
**Author:** ![Padeye](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a9a28c/32.png) [@Padeye](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Padeye)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 5:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism-vs-evolution/237673/2 "2004-04-01T05:42:23Z")
You’re not likely to get a very lively debate as you’ll be hard pressed to find many dopers who think biblical creation should be taught in schools. I’m a Christian and I don’t believe it should be taught. Note that I don’t believe in a literal intrepetation of the creation story in Genesis. Bottom line it shouldn’t be taught as it may be a violation of the first amendment prohibition of goverment establishing a religion. The site is interesting and may be a useful tool in approaching the teaching of evolution to those who might otherwise have a closed mind on the subject. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 5:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism-vs-evolution/237673/3 "2004-04-01T05:46:52Z")
> [@iamme99](#): > > \*\*The question for debate is - since creationism is really a religious belief and is not backed by any science or factual evidence, why should it be considered as valid to be taught in public schools? Aren’t those who “believe” in creationism essentially trying to impose their beliefs on others at the expense of the doctrine of separation of government and religion? \*\* Yes it’s purley a religious belief, no, it isn’t valid to teach it in PS classrooms and yes, those who want to tech creationism in public schools are promoting an unconstitutional religious agenda. I don’t think you’re going to find much opposition to those premises on this board, though. We don’t have many creationists and even the ones who do post here generally don’t support teaching it in public schools. ---
**Author:** ![Zagadka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zagadka/32/7272_2.png) [@Zagadka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zagadka)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 5:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism-vs-evolution/237673/4 "2004-04-01T05:47:37Z")
(Fiat Lux, Go Bears!) I agree. Religion and science, as pointed out on the Berkeley site, can co-exist easily, and most frequently do. I would be surprised to find many Dopers who take a strict,` literal Creationist stance. Government is prevented from establishing religion - not science. I think that is pretty clear cut. Philisophically speaking, one could make the argument that science is a religion, but that is a loose case at best. ---
**Author:** ![Kinthalis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kinthalis/32/16084_2.png) [@Kinthalis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kinthalis)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 5:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism-vs-evolution/237673/5 "2004-04-01T05:57:06Z")
> [@Zagadka](#): > > (Fiat Lux, Go Bears!) > > Philisophically speaking, one could make the argument that science is a religion, but that is a loose case at best. I think that that is no case at all 😉 As already stated: 1. It is unconstitutional to teach creationism in public schools. 2. It is STUPID to want to teach creationism in a SCIENCE classroom. Combine the two and see what you get 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Kinthalis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kinthalis/32/16084_2.png) [@Kinthalis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kinthalis)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 5:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism-vs-evolution/237673/6 "2004-04-01T05:59:10Z")
PS: Is THAT website the best that $400,000+ can bring about? Granted, I haven’t clicked on much yet, but jeez. A little pizzaz, something to catch the eyes of the youngin’s! Something other than a grey circle! ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 9:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism-vs-evolution/237673/7 "2004-04-01T09:04:21Z")
Creationism fails to meet the definition of science; it is unable/unwilling to modify or discard its root hypotheses and so it cannot implement the scientific method. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 11:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism-vs-evolution/237673/8 "2004-04-01T11:59:04Z")
I think the evolutionists need to learn something about politics. ---
**Author:** ![Kinthalis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kinthalis/32/16084_2.png) [@Kinthalis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kinthalis)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 1:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism-vs-evolution/237673/9 "2004-04-01T13:07:54Z")
> [@Libertarian](#): > > I think the evolutionists need to learn something about politics. Is that your way of saying we should be nice to creationists? Or that we’re been to hard on them? I stand by statments: 1. It is unconstitutional to teach creation myth in a public school. It is a CLEAR violation of the separation of church and state. 2. It is STUPID to want to teach creation myth in a SCIENCE classroom. I mean seriously, how does that work? Anyone suggesting such a thing must have not been listening to a word their science teachers said. It’s like trying to teach math class, whilehaving some group of people demand that instead of 1 + 1 = 2 they should also teach that 1 + 1 = 3. 😕 ---
**Author:** ![Aeschines](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aeschines/32/16251_2.png) [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 1:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism-vs-evolution/237673/10 "2004-04-01T13:20:43Z")
Creationism should be given passing mention in schools as what mankind used to believe when it was butt-ignorant and didn’t know any better. ---
**Author:** ![Grey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b782af/32.png) [@Grey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grey)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 1:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism-vs-evolution/237673/11 "2004-04-01T13:40:12Z")
> [@Libertarian](#): > > I think the evolutionists need to learn something about politics. Well you might as well say you think gravitationalists need to learn something about politics. When it comes down to it, there is a vocal group upset that evolution puts their origins myth in a bad light, and they’d rather not have to hear that. ---
**Author:** ![HumptysHamhole](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f0a364/32.png) [@HumptysHamhole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HumptysHamhole)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism-vs-evolution/237673/12 "2004-04-01T13:57:10Z")
> [@](#): > > there is a vocal group upset that evolution puts their origins myth in a bad light, and they’d rather not have to hear that. The point is that creationists don’t think the story is a myth. Christians such as myself who do believe it as a myth (not as in un-true but true in a different way) have no problem with evolutionary theory. I might be able to make a distinction here between scientific evolution and popular evolutionism. As a Christian I object to the latter being taught in school but not the former. ---
**Author:** ![Grey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b782af/32.png) [@Grey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grey)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 2:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism-vs-evolution/237673/13 "2004-04-01T14:04:27Z")
> [@HumptysHamhole](#): > > The point is that creationists don’t think the story is a myth. Christians such as myself who do believe it as a myth (not as in un-true but true in a different way) have no problem with evolutionary theory. > > I might be able to make a distinction here between scientific evolution and popular evolutionism. As a Christian I object to the latter being taught in school but not the former. I’m not sure I understand why the difference between scientific and popular conceptions of evolution make it any less valid for a science class than discussing “action at a distance” Newtonian gravity instead of space-time curvature. How does that work? ---
**Author:** ![HumptysHamhole](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f0a364/32.png) [@HumptysHamhole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HumptysHamhole)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism-vs-evolution/237673/14 "2004-04-01T14:22:34Z")
> [@](#): > > I’m not sure I understand why the difference between scientific and popular conceptions of evolution make it any less valid for a science class than discussing “action at a distance” Newtonian gravity instead of space-time curvature. How does that work? Here is what I mean. The popular use of the term evolution tends to imply “getting better” or improvement. We use this term in out discussions of politics and society for instance. There is nothing wrong with the use of that term in those areas as a concept but it shouldn’t be transferred to the study of biological evolution. In fact we should be careful not to allow that sort of use of the term evolution to distort the real scientific picture of evolution. Natural selection dosen’t always lead to improvement really – just change. We as humans evaluate what is better or worse by our own standards. Evolution through natural selection dosen’t have values outside of the mechanism. There is also a second thing I had in mind when I mentioned “popular” evolution. That is the tendency for some people to try to expand the concepts of evolutionary theory to be all-encompassing – a sort of unified theory for all aspects of existence. Desmond Morris comes to mind as someone who often crosses this line in his attempt to explain just about everything human in terms of evolution. Sometimes these explanations can make sense, but often these explanations don’t provide a better or even adequate theory in the face of say a psychological, sociological, etc. theory. I guess I am arguing that theories of psychological evolution, sociological evolution, political evolution, etc. have no place in a biology classroom because they are really very different than biological evolution and they are not nearly as well defined or as supported by the scientific evidence. They often get all mixed up in the popular concept of evolution though. ---
**Author:** ![Kinthalis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kinthalis/32/16084_2.png) [@Kinthalis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kinthalis)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism-vs-evolution/237673/15 "2004-04-01T14:26:17Z")
> [@HumptysHamhole](#): > > Here is what I mean. The popular use of the term evolution tends to imply “getting better” or improvement. We use this term in out discussions of politics and society for instance. There is nothing wrong with the use of that term in those areas as a concept but it shouldn’t be transferred to the study of biological evolution. … Where does this happen? Your beef is with the science board fo the school that actually teaches that. I certainly didn’t learn that in my school. ---
**Author:** ![Aeschines](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aeschines/32/16251_2.png) [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 2:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism-vs-evolution/237673/16 "2004-04-01T14:29:52Z")
Humpty, As to what “spin” people put on evolutionary theory, sure, you’re free to argue. But the core of the theory is as solid as anything. The details may be wrong, but we know that life forms on Earth evolved from other life forms. Jesus did NOT snap his fingers and call them into being. ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism-vs-evolution/237673/17 "2004-04-01T15:23:37Z")
> [@Kinthalis](#): > > Where does this happen? Your beef is with the science board fo the school that actually teaches that. I certainly didn’t learn that in my school. What he is referring to is called “social Darwinism”. This was a mis-guided attempt to use “science” to justify racism and other social evils. The vestiges of this are still around. ---
**Author:** ![Grey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b782af/32.png) [@Grey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grey)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism-vs-evolution/237673/18 "2004-04-01T15:34:17Z")
In a biology or general science class? Unlikely and not a reason to stop teaching basic evolution. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism-vs-evolution/237673/19 "2004-04-01T15:40:25Z")
I interpreted **Lib** as referring to the sometimes quite sophisticated and persistent political machinations employed by creationists to further their agenda, with the implication that those opposing creationists should get up to speed, as simply having the facts on your side may not be enough to prevail. ---
**Author:** ![Cervaise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cervaise/32/16693_2.png) [@Cervaise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cervaise)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism-vs-evolution/237673/20 "2004-04-01T21:35:32Z")
> [@HumptysHamhole](#): > > The popular use of the term evolution tends to imply “getting better” or improvement. … Natural selection dosen’t always lead to improvement really – just change. … Evolution through natural selection dosen’t have values outside of the mechanism. You are correct about how evolution is usually popularly misconstrued. We regularly see posts on the board, in GQ and GD mostly, where a layperson casually uses terms like “more evolved” or “higher life” or whatever. The irony, of course— and it is real irony, not the watered-down Alanis-style pseudo-irony— is that the hardcore fundamentalists’ active efforts at obstructing the teaching of evolution in school in a detailed and thorough manner are a big contributor to these popular misunderstandings. Evolution is a scientific fact, but keeping the scripture-thumpers happy requires teaching said fact in a wishy-washy, half-assed sort of way. So there’s no wonder, really, that the fact is not accurately absorbed by the population. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism-vs-evolution/237673.md?page=2)