Of all the things to come up today in my mind, it was this. Now I know for some people this might be a sensitive topic, but theres other topics that have been talked about and have been handled in a intellectual manner. I cant help but wonder about this topic and whats the big deal about it anyway. So heres my question, Why dont people want Evolution to be taught in schools? Whats the big deal about it not being taught? Does it offend people? Does it make people feel uncomftable? Or is it because it just doesnt agree with people and the way people think?

Maybe someone here can tell me why, and thats all I want to know, is why?Nothing else (no discussion), Just why...I want legit answers, something from a Human, not something that is instructed by your beliefs.

Its something I cant help but wonder about, and many of you that have seen my writings would have to agree its my nature to wonder about things.

That is a good question bro *Sits back and waits for answers*

Here's my take on the situation:

My only issue with evolution being taught in schools is that it is taught as fact. The THEORY of evolution is, by definition, a theory. If they're gonna tach it, it should be taught as such in addition to the rest of the theories on creation.

Now, I understand that not all theories on creation can be taught, there are tons. But the most common is that of a higher being creating life on this planet. If curricular administrators would just include both of these being taught as theories, no problems...at least, no problems for me. I'm sure there are others who would still find this unacceptable.

Well... aside from by beliefs (Christian) I find it all so vague... there is just so much science can't
explain and but so little it can... on the topic of evolution... if everything could be explained & proved
in a true scientific matter, I guess peeps would take less offense... what science thought was true
about evolution has been proven wrong multiple times & replaced by yet another scientific theory...

No wonder peeps are reluctant...

Just my 2cents...

TDR

I think it's an issue of power and control. In the same way the notion of the Solar System being helio-centric instead of geo-centric disproved the belief that "god's creation" was the center of the universe; instructing students the theory of evolution takes away the wholeness of gods power in creating the universe. The concept that there's another option besides holy creation diminshes the "Church's" hold over it's congregation and that encourages the size of the congregation to dwindle. As the congregation gets smaller, the "Church's" income shrinks and THAT'S when Church leaders start getting upset. They then tell their "flock" that evolution is bad and the "flock" (being members of the PTA) then pass on this discontent to the School Board.

Etc., etc.

Quote: Originally Posted by pwrslyd Here's my take on the situation: My only issue with evolution being taught in schools is that it is taught as fact. The THEORY of evolution is, by definition, a theory. If they're gonna tach it, it should be taught as such in addition to the rest of the theories on creation. Now, I understand that not all theories on creation can be taught, there are tons. But the most common is that of a higher being creating life on this planet. If curricular administrators would just include both of these being taught as theories, no problems...at least, no problems for me. I'm sure there are others who would still find this unacceptable.

So then, it may not be the peoples fault, but rather the News People. Im researching google news, and MOST sources say just evolution. They dont say weither if they are fighting against it as a fact or Theory.

I believe, in books when I was in school they had written ". . . . Darwins Theory . . . " (back in 5th grade and such..) and thats all. But I still dont see the problem. Maybe Im not also comprehending the issue fully.

Quote: Originally Posted by hartigan I think it's an issue of power and control. In the same way the notion of the Solar System being helio-centric instead of geo-centric disproved the belief that "god's creation" was the center of the universe; instructing students the theory of evolution takes away the wholeness of gods power in creating the universe. The concept that there's another option besides holy creation diminshes the "Church's" hold over it's congregation and that encourages the size of the congregation to dwindle. As the congregation gets smaller, the "Church's" income shrinks and THAT'S when Church leaders start getting upset. They then tell their "flock" that evolution is bad and the "flock" (being members of the PTA) then pass on this discontent to the School Board. Etc., etc.

I agree, The church for a long time was about control. I think people are starting to realize that fact, and wake up to it. When I see churches around where I live the size of a small mall, that is not a church it is a business. As you stated when that business starts to lose money they start stuff like this.

Quote: Originally Posted by pwrslyd My only issue with evolution being taught in schools is that it is taught as fact. The THEORY of evolution is, by definition, a theory. If they're gonna tach it, it should be taught as such in addition to the rest of the theories on creation. Now, I understand that not all theories on creation can be taught, there are tons. But the most common is that of a higher being creating life on this planet. If curricular administrators would just include both of these being taught as theories, no problems...at least, no problems for me. I'm sure there are others who would still find this unacceptable.

Everything in science is a theory. One of the most basic issues is the misunderstanding between what a "pulled out of my ass" theory vs a scientific theory is. A scientific theory is a set of rules that explain a natural phenomenon. These rules have been extensively backed up by research by many many people. They also often predict something that is not known. Evolution is this type of theory.
Creationism is not backed up by any factual evidence. You cannot cite the bible or other religious texts because these disagree with one another and therefore cancel each other out. No experiment that has ever been performed has led credence to the creationism theory.

If you stop teaching evolution, you have to stop teaching science, and then let's see how fast our computers run in 20 years.

Quote: Originally Posted by TDR what science thought was true about evolution has been proven wrong multiple times & replaced by yet another scientific theory

That's not true either. The core hypotheses put forth by evolution are still held to be true. As with any theory (including gravity), there have been refinements over time.

Now, to answer your question, the reason people don't want evolution taught in schools is because they want their kids to grow up with an unquestioning belief in whatever religious faith the parents have. It's an entirely religious argument, and is incredibly backwards. As posted by hartigan, it's similar to the geo-centric vs. heliocentric debate. One is a scientific theory that help explains the real world, while the other is a religion-induced fantasy.

As other folks say, the only "facts" we have about Evolution is that it is a theory.

On the other hand, the only "facts" we have about Creationism is that it's a theory (religious in origin).

The Truth of the matter is that no one really knows what the truth is, and none of it is provable at this point in time. Both sides are arguable, however, and that argument (as you can tell) has been going for a long time.

But the question you have is, Why do people have a problem with Evolution being taught in schoo? Ultimately, it comes down to religious belief. Many arguments have the same origin. If you believe, whole-heartedly, that God created the universe, do you want your children being taught that God did not create the universe, and in fact, God may not even exist?

That's like telling a Red Sox fan his children are being taught to root for the Yankees.

Ultimately, either teach both theories, or teach neither. Personally, I'm for keeping the theories out of primary education -- at least the K-8 range -- and don't broach the subject until children are mature enough to start making decisions for themselves. Then the parents can only say, "I've taught them what I know, they have to go out in the world on their own and make their own decisions." Or at least, make sure the students realize that both beliefs are *theories* ... the educational system is supposed to be providing known facts to our children, and neither of those fit that guideline.

Personally, I don't really know what's right and what's wrong. "Intelligent Design" is all the rage these days, which supports the concept of "perhaps we did evolve a little bit, but only because God built the world in such a way that we would evolve over time." Which, of course, begs the question: how much more does he intend for us to evolve? But I haven't heard anyone ask or even attempt to answer that question.

Are you glad you asked?

-godling

Quote: Originally Posted by godling As other folks say, the only "facts" we have about Evolution is that it is a theory. On the other hand, the only "facts" we have about Creationism is that it's a theory (religious in origin). The Truth of the matter is that no one really knows what the truth is, and none of it is provable at this point in time. Both sides are arguable, however, and that argument (as you can tell) has been going for a long time. But the question you have is, Why do people have a problem with Evolution being taught in schoo? Ultimately, it comes down to religious belief. Many arguments have the same origin. If you believe, whole-heartedly, that God created the universe, do you want your children being taught that God did not create the universe, and in fact, God may not even exist? That's like telling a Red Sox fan his children are being taught to root for the Yankees. Ultimately, either teach both theories, or teach neither. Personally, I'm for keeping the theories out of primary education -- at least the K-8 range -- and don't broach the subject until children are mature enough to start making decisions for themselves. Then the parents can only say, "I've taught them what I know, they have to go out in the world on their own and make their own decisions." Or at least, make sure the students realize that both beliefs are *theories* ... the educational system is supposed to be providing known facts to our children, and neither of those fit that guideline. Personally, I don't really know what's right and what's wrong. "Intelligent Design" is all the rage these days, which supports the concept of "perhaps we did evolve a little bit, but only because God built the world in such a way that we would evolve over time." Which, of course, begs the question: how much more does he intend for us to evolve? But I haven't heard anyone ask or even attempt to answer that question. Are you glad you asked? -godling

Great post godling. Exactly what i wanted to say and worded infinitely better....

Sorry, godling, I know our posts overlapped...

Quote: As other folks say, the only "facts" we have about Evolution is that it is a theory. On the other hand, the only "facts" we have about Creationism is that it's a theory (religious in origin).

This isn't true in the slightest. There are a ton of facts about evolution. If you guys want, I'll start listing references, but it's gonna take a while to list them all. Here's a nice list to start with:
http://www.ncbi.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed
Go there and type Evolution into the search bar. It brought up about 170,000 references

Quote: Originally Posted by Bionic Everything in science is a theory.

Well, no, not really.

Scientific theories help explain the real world, and are often right most of the time. However, they are unproven.
Scientific LAWS are theories that have been proven correct in all cases. Heard of the Laws of Thermodynamics? They always apply. Heard of the Laws of Evolution? Nope ... and there's a reason: can't be *proven*, only argued emphatically with a personal certainty that borders on religious belief ...

Funny, that.

-godling

Gravity is a theory.
No one knows why objects have gravity.

Do you propose we stop teaching our children that stepping off a cliff is bad for them?

In many ways, gravity is an even worse theory than evolution, because we don't have nearly as many (laboratory) experiments backing it up.

::EDIT::
Atomic Theory is also just that, a theory. Using that theory we creating the H-bomb, nuclear power, and the field of chemistry

The "laws" of thermodynamics actually don't always apply when you investigate deeper into quantum theory. Much like Newton's "laws" of physics don't apply when looking at quantum mechanics.
I stand by what I said, absolutely everything in science is a theory.

Quote: Originally Posted by godling Well, no, not really. Scientific theories help explain the real world, and are often right most of the time. However, they are unproven. Scientific LAWS are theories that have been proven correct in all cases. Heard of the Laws of Thermodynamics? They always apply. Heard of the Laws of Evolution? Nope ... and there's a reason: can't be *proven*, only argued emphatically with a personal certainty that borders on religious belief ... Funny, that. -godling

True - the idea behind science revolves around DISPROVING other theories.
Now I agree that there will be a bunch of staunch creationists out there who wouldn't want Darwin's or Hawking's heretic "take" of how things started being taught to their kids.
I feel that it is equally wrong that creationism should be adopted as the sole theory taught to kids either (due to it being insensitive to other religious faiths - not to mention the evolutionists)

I'm sitting on the fence here (can you tell?)
Aah, political correctness and cultural sensitivity....

To summarize my previous post:

Religion is a business and evolution is BAD marketing. Evolution doesn't attract loyal customers, it promotes the opposing product. Whether evolution is real, fact or theory is irrelevant. What matters is that it's NOT the holy gospel to which religion subscribes.

I personally think it is almost sickening that evolution isnt taught. How can it be right and fair to impose one theory on children at the most impressionable stage of their lives and completely ignore the other side. Its all very well and good learning about Christianity, Hinduism, Buddism, Islam etc... but there are just as many people in this world who BELIEVE in creation. Whether it is a case for belief or fact is, as Nerdz has said, not for this thread.

I understand that some strings of evolution are taught in conjunction with biology or science classes but i surely it should be taught on the same level as other creation beliefs?!

I'd better stop there or i risk going into a rave and then there would be no stopping me! lol


I'm interested to see what everyone else has to say on this one...



Mark

MasterP, it sounds like you are advocating the logical approach: to teach competing theories about these matters, where they belong - in a philosophy class.

Evolution is still the theory accepted by almost every scientist, and it is almost indescribably powerful. I use the theory of evolution every single day in my work. Because of that, it and it alone needs to be taught in science classes, unless a competing scientific theory (see definition above) is found to be more powerful or insightful.

::EDIT:: Mark: currently evolution is taught in most science classes. There are some who argue that creationism should also be taught in science class, or that evolution should be derided.

From my personal experience on this matter, it boils down to fear . . . I know quite a few people that when you begin to argue that Evolution does show us the path that our ancestry took to reach us, wether guided by random events or by the hand of a Creator, the main stopping point is 'that we decended from monkeys'.

Yes, let me say this again . . . "We could not have decended from those dirty monkeys" is the most common argument that I have heard in the 'real world' for why Evolution, guided or otherwise, can't be the way of the world.

WHY is that such an upsetting thought? I don't have any problem at all with the idea that we came to be from lesser beings . . . The IMPORTANT thing is that we know what we are NOW, and try to act accordingly. But these people who have used that argument always seem to feel that if we came from lesser animals, this means that we, in turn, ARE lesser animals . . . They miss out completely that what is important is HOW we are making this journey as humans, not how we got here to BE human.

Theory or Fact, that argument is besides the point . . . People need to loosen up and understand that we are what we are, and we came up from what we came up from . . . Nothing can change that. We are currently defined as a species by who and what we are, and the legacy we will leave behind. I, for one, don't want it to be a legacy based on ignorance because someone got offended by the way things are.

My $.02.

D

Quote: Originally Posted by drougnor From my personal experience on this matter, it boils down to fear . . .

and to control fear is to control the person = Power.

Quote: Originally Posted by Bionic Gravity is a theory. No one knows why objects have gravity.

Well, true, but we do know that objects do have gravity, and we can calculate the amount of gravity an object will have given basic parameters. Similarly, we can calculate the size / weight / whatever of an object given a particular gravity. (Obviously, there are a limited number of variables that can exist on either side of the equation. I'm not intimately familiar with that science.)

Quote: Do you propose we stop teaching our children that stepping off a cliff is bad for them?

By that same standard, do you propose we stop teaching children that religion is wrong? Or that killing someone is a bad thing to do? After all, many of our laws in socieyt are based on religious history. And there are plenty of "documented, proven" cases where prayer and spirituality have actually caused an effect on some aspect within society, though calculating the effect of prayer is ... an interesting idea.

Quote: ::EDIT:: Atomic Theory is also just that, a theory. Using that theory we creating the H-bomb, nuclear power, and the field of chemistry

As I said, scientific theories help explain things in our world. Atomic Theory (some of which became law) helped us explain how to build those very things, and improved the field of chemistry.

Quote: The "laws" of thermodynamics actually don't always apply when you investigate deeper into quantum theory. Much like Newton's "laws" of physics don't apply when looking at quantum mechanics. I stand by what I said, absolutely everything in science is a theory.

Ah, quantum. Now that's some interesting sh1te. I'm still waiting for the real shoe to drop on that, and find out what it's truly all about. Should be interesting. But most scientists agree that once you throw the quantum word out, most of the pre-existing rules just go to hell. But is quantum physics something entirely different than "physics"? Is it considered a different "medium" (for lack of a better word) and therefore something you cannot -- and should not -- apply the same math to? Another argument altogether.

Gotta run, grad school calls ...

-godling