Intelligent Design Vs. Evolution which should be taught in schools?

[semeticsister 0]

I am so sick of these poop headed religious bigots saying that Intelligent design should be taught in schools! The only claim they have to back up there case is this:"A vast majority of America believes intelligent design."This is so stupid. Just because a majority believe something, it does not make it true!It's not like I'm against religion or God or anything, I'm just saying that intelligent is not a science; you can't use the scientific method on it or experiment with it. If it's not science, don't teach it in a science classroom! Simple as that.

[JasperIk 0]

Personally i think this should go into the debate forum, because its very debatable (and makes a good debate topic) Science class is to teach science, NOT religion. If christians do not agree with evolution or do not want to learn about it, than they should go to a Christian School, or be homeschooled. If Intelligent Design was based on science, then yeah it should be taught in school, but its just a theory that is based on people's beliefs, not actualy scientific evidence.People complain athiests are trying to force their beliefs onto others, well having Intelligent Design would be the same, atleast Evolution [an "athiest belief" ] can almost most definetly be proven, there for it is a theory, where as Intelligent Design is a belief, based on Belief. Evolution should be the only thing taught, its not like it hurts you to open your mind a little. Intelligent Design is just rubbish in my opinion, Evolution actually makes sense...Intelligent Design is just saying believe in God, believe In God, Believe in God...thats all i hear from it.

[eee 0]

agreed^^ very good topicmaybe they shouldnt teach either to resist conflict or altercationsin my opinion though they should teach both sides like this is what so and so and so is and vice versa so then they canhave good debates as long as teachers dont take it in their hands and exclude one or for some reason i feel there would be conflicts and altercations in the debategreat topic again.

[eee 0]

Personally i think this should go into the debate forum, because its very debatable (and makes a good debate topic)

 

Science class is to teach science, NOT religion. If christians do not agree with evolution or do not want to learn about it, than they should go to a Christian School, or be homeschooled. If Intelligent Design was based on science, then yeah it should be taught in school, but its just a theory that is based on people's beliefs, not actualy scientific evidence.

 

People complain athiests are trying to force their beliefs onto others, well having Intelligent Design would be the same, atleast Evolution [an "athiest belief"  ] can almost most definetly be proven, there for it is a theory, where as Intelligent Design is a belief, based on Belief.

 

Evolution should be the only thing taught, its not like it hurts you to open your mind a little. Intelligent Design is just rubbish in my opinion, Evolution actually makes sense...Intelligent Design is just saying believe in God, believe In God, Believe in God...thats all i hear from it.

223805[/snapback]

i agree with the religion part somehow it is always popped-up into science topics(certain) for some reason don't know why prolly cuz of their beliefs and such...

[Hamtaro 0]

I think they should teach it. I mean, I don't believe in evolution, and I am FORCED to learn it. It's only fair to those who do believe in evolution to be taught something that they don't believe in. I can't stand learning about evolution. Personally, I'm also getting tired of hearing about the debates on this on tv.

I am so sick of these poop headed religious bigots saying that Intelligent design should be taught in schools!

By the way, don't insult religous people! Heck, I'm not extremely religous, but I still defend my religion. I sorta consider that comment to be offensive to me, as well.

[kasm 0]

.. to back up there case is this:

"A vast majority of America believes intelligent design." This is so stupid. Just because a majority believe something, it does not make it true!

 

It's not like I'm against religion or God or anything, I'm just saying that intelligent is not a science; you can't use the scientific method on it or experiment with it. If it's not science, don't teach it in a science classroom! Simple as that.

223777[/snapback]

1. In fact neither Creation nor Evolution nor Designl Intelligence should be taught in science classes or in school in general.

 

2. I am scientist to highest degree and I stress that Evolution is not science but belief. Evolution is Fiction and not Facts. There are known method of proof. There are nothing to proof this hypothesis . you can't use the scientific method on it or experiment with it either. There is definition to science and Evolution don't satisfy it. Evolution hijacked the science and is continuing to do so by shouting and the passive actions for the believer.

 

3. All science branches can be taught without Evolution. I wonder how was the Biology, Genetics [started by monk in monstry] Astronomy , Chemistry, Physics was taught before this Evolution hypothesis. Moreover Mathematics and Computer and Physiology, Anatomy, Medicine Health Sociology, Business Studies, Languages don't needs the Evolution hypothesis. How many great invention were made before it. How many scientist in past and now [included me ] are believer. The problem is the minority are winning by shouting and majority are loosing by their passiveness. It is minority dictatorship which enforces their belief[not the facts] on the majority [ Why we blame Hitler then]. They repeat their leaders blided and attack any opposition.

 

4. I was one of the pioneer students who studied Darwinism in 1959 [i.e 47 years ago] by my choice because it was optional subject. I considered it as the English novel "The lost world " [which about dinosaurs and missing link ] was in our curricula in that time too. I answered it as we quoted now what the other say but not what I believe. I got 27 from 30 [i don't forget things happened since 3 years old age. It is Gift from God].

[switch 0]

kasm, you know what you're talking about!

 

Some would definately argue that there is more concrete evidence for Intelligent design than evolution. My mate Scott had an incredibly interesting argument about it.

 

The argument is that:

-> stars cool down as they age (basic astronomy).

-> our Sun has only been cool enough to support life for X years. (sorry, not sure on exact numbers)

-> The minimum amount of time that it would take for a human to evolve from a single-celled amoeba is longer than X years.

--> So the Earth has not been able to support life for as long as it would take for humans to evolve.

 

Another argument is in relation to the saltiness of the sea:

-> Once again, with all factors tweaked in favour of evolution.

->The sea is actually not salty enough for the Earth to have been around long enough for human beings to evolve.

 

So, there's evidence for and against. Anyway, most of the argument for large-scale evolution is made by common people (i.e. not professional evolutionary scientists) using science as an excuse. Think about it.

 

Charles Darwin's theory of Evolution was Micro-Mutational. (Meaning consists of many small variations in genetic code passed on from generation to generation) These micro-mutations allow creatures to adapt in small ways, giving them a slight upper hand. Not changes them completely so that they can dominate their territory.

 

And then there's the fact that everything in nature fits together so beautifully. Random Accident? I think not.

[saga 0]

1. In fact neither Creation nor Evolution nor Designl Intelligence should be taught in science classes or in school in general.

 

223896[/snapback]

then what should be taught in science classes which will touch the topic of the beginning of man? or even the progress of life itself?

 

i think i will stick to evolution becuase religion is a tool for oppression for the elite.. and beside evolution is the closest to the facts.... rather than pure idealism which is the root of religion.. maybe schools should teach materialism the one from marx but of course he is a communist that would enrage a capitalist state if such idea is taught in schools hehhehehehe

[kasm 0]

then what should be taught in science classes which will touch the topic of the beginning of man? or even the progress of life itself?

 

i think i will stick to evolution becuase religion is a tool for oppression for the elite.. and beside evolution is the closest to the facts.... rather than pure idealism which is the root of religion.. maybe schools should teach materialism the one from marx but of course he is a communist that would enrage a capitalist state if such idea is taught in schools hehhehehehe

223951[/snapback]

1. Saga, it is not necessary that tiny point , "the beginning of man?" since nobody can approve his/her story. It is a beleif so has different version. So I suggest we have to make it out of school for church, media , books and clubs. If some people can not believe the story of Genisus happened 7 thousands year ago. how they can trust and believe fantasy stories alleged happened billions of year?. Nobody is thinking without prejeduce, can believe that an big bang explostion can create a life. It did destructions and may be if it happened initiated the universe. Yes the universe is expanding but not mean it according to big bang theory. Scientifically can not be proved. It fact if you don't know there are many theories compete with the big bang theory. Moreover until now nobody could create a tiny living cell from scratch. THEN THAT WHAT I SUGGESTED THAT WE LEAVE IT TO OUT OF SCHOOL AND WE WILL NOT LOOSE A LOT BY DOING THAT.

 

2. Obsession is happened in history before the relegion. What Alexander did. What the Roman and Persian Empire has done?. What Jenkis Khan did? Etc etc. So we have to not blame the relegion that make it better but not and absolutely dark. Read history ofv Europe before Christianity. Read history of Africa and the tribes who diminish others. Anyhow this point out of the this thread'd topic but to reply to saga. Morever my suggestion is to leave relegion and Evolution out of schools.

 

3. Materialism and Idealism can be taught in philosphy classes where some student will choose it. Because they are belief. The Logic only can be studied for all because it is the father for Math which other sciece branch depends. Also the Logic can teach students how to prove and argue the right way.

[heavensounds 0]

I think that the whole evolution thing is not true or is a matter of belief...so if people are sooooo against putting religion in school than i don't see any reason why evolution and other scientific crap should be there...cos' if you ask me it is all a matter of belief! Material evidence or experience is not something that i'd completely trust, because all these things are percieved with our 5 senses and those can be vary tricky sometimes...if you melt wax it changes completely and everything that you can sense with 5 senses is changed but you still know that this is that same wax!How is that? science is goin to talk about molecules and other *BLEEP* we cannot see unless we use certain metods which were also invented in human mind that could be wrong! So..i don't see why should i turst science and why should i learn of it in schools...greetz

[CroSpartacus 0]

I believe Intelligent Design should be taught in school. Liberals appear to be so ""open-minded"" while we are "close-minded" but look at their hypocrisy not wanting Intelligent Design to be taught as well as evolution.

[Cerebral Stasis 0]

But there are so many possible theories aside from Intelligent Design and Evolution. What about those? What if I believed that there were two boulders sitting on two hills, and then they suddenly started rolling downhill toward eachother, knocking together and shattering, and from them all life suddenly popped out? Shouldn't I have MY concept of the beginnings of life taught as well?No, the best way to avoid this fiesta is to avoid it COMPLETELY - do not teach any theory at all concerning how life or the Universe started/was created. It is not necessary knowledge for one to have in order to get a good career and succeed in life, so what is the point of teaching it? It only opens huge cans of worms. If kids want to know where everything came from, they should be told to ask their parents, and then their parents can teach them anything they like. Just keep it out of school.

[alfredglenstein 0]

No, the best way to avoid this fiesta is to avoid it COMPLETELY - do not teach any theory at all concerning how life or the Universe started/was created. It is not necessary knowledge for one to have in order to get a good career and succeed in life, so what is the point of teaching it? It only opens huge cans of worms. If kids want to know where everything came from, they should be told to ask their parents, and then their parents can teach them anything they like. Just keep it out of school.

224328[/snapback]

At first I was wondering if this was a kind of parody on people who argue against evolution, but sadly, it is not. I think as a science, the starting point of life is as relevant a study as any other involved in biology (unless you want to also go through biology and remove all other parts of it which are unlikely to net you a career- a very corrupted form of biology if I've ever heard of one!), and actually, it is something that our kids may end up choosing for a career in their life. Why not? I'm not sure how you can say this, unless you just aren't a science student or were alienated from it because it didn't interest you, or whatever other reason. It's just as important a field as history (and how much more relevant or job-ready is that?)

 

I think avoidance is the simple and easy way out. Will there be confrontation? Fine. Maybe it will finally arouse some of our high school kids to get inspired about a subject, and if a high school can at least do that, they have surely accomplished something that rarely happens with high schoolers, especially in the realm of science. I really think it is wrong to look at the stress of a conflict alone as a reason to avoid the situation.. (and its kind of a psuedo conflict stirred up by creationists, whose angle is "teach the controversy".. the controversy which they have been pressing upon a subject relatively calm and in consensus at least in a general sense).

 

Also, it is important I think, to learn about evolution because of the sense of civility and intellectualism (at whatever minimal level) it puts in our high schoolers. I want them to be able to look at a tree an know about how it grows, or to look at a dog or a bird and to think about their evolutionary history. It elevates our level of thinking that has become the standard for us modern people, and it's kind of nice to have a line such as this to be able to seperate us from the more ignorant generations and civilizations of the past.

[Cool_Freaker 0]

i think first and foremost, the ability to make one's own choices should be taught to the next generation. there are too many mindless zombies around in society these days.intelligent design is taught in the churches, evolution is being taught at more at schools. it balances out pretty fine. what should really be taught is the ability for one to make a circumspect decision on which of these theories suits onself best

[Thorned Rose 0]

I see a lot of people arguing for and against and a lot of people coming up with points that they think prove one way or the other. Also a lot of people saying that you can't prove one way or the other because there is no scientific method/experiments that can be done to prove either - On the contrary. I have seen scientific experiments for both. Some proved either side and some disproved. kasm, you said that there is no scientific proof so far for evolution and no experiments that can be done to prove it - that's not true. For example, some years ago an experiment was created that replicated primordial earth. Amino acids 'spontaneously' occurred and amino acids are one of the building blocks of life. The experiment, if left long enough, would have then produced proteins... Or another (unrelated) study found that ALL living creatures on earth have at least one gene in common. These genes are known as homeobox or hox genes. For example, humans and mice have 4 hox clusters, meaning that if a particular characteristic from these clusters was taken from one and transplanted in the other, it would function exactly the same. To clarify, if you took the gene that makes eyes from the mouse and replaced the human gene for eyes with the mouse one, the human wouldn't end up with mouse eyes, it would still have human eyes. Why? Because the mouse gene is virtually exactly the same as the human gene. Hox genes indicate that all living creatures on earth have a common ancestor. I could of course, if you like, come up with more experiments and research that lends itself towards evolution but that would take up a lot of time and space and I know that some people will only argue contradictions anyway. To be fair, I have seen some good research into Intelligent Design, but at the same time, I'm afraid, I've seen more that disproves it and more that supports evolution. That is not to say that I don't believe in God, I do but not as most people would and for that matter I don't believe humans evolved on Earth (no I am not one of those Raelians or anything remotely like them )You have to understand that everything is science and science is everything. That may sound a bit odd but true when you think about it. Science is the subject of the universe. It shows how the universe works. Just because something has not yet been 'proven' in science does not mean it does not have a scientific grounding. I'm a very spiritual person yet I believe that my soul has a scientific 'explanation' just as much as gravity, or molecular weight, or lightspeed or mendelian genetics or anything else anyone considers 'sciencey'. (And no I am not a scientologist - I don't belong to any religious group or pertain to any religious beliefs before you ask). Evolution is a much bigger subject than just genes and life on earth just as Creationism and Intelligent Design have much more far reaching implications. But before anyone accuses me of sitting on the fence, I'm with evolution. It's still happening all around if you look.