3 ms·

How does one "teach" creationism? Answer: you don't. Simply reciting "god did it" over and over is sufficient. No, this is Christian apologetics that they ar

How does one "teach" creationism? Answer: you don't. Simply reciting "god did it" over and over is sufficient. No, this is Christian apologetics that they are teaching. In other words it's a religion class, NOT a science class. If this school is taking public money, those funds need to be withdrawn until the curriculum is properly labeled.

fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
As an Atheist, I am not generally opposed to a religion class, even a compulsory one. Religion is a reality, and ignoring it is as bad as ignoring any other reality. Teaching creationism is worse than a mere study of religion because it promotes rote memorization of demonstrably incorrect ideas as facts.
- stephenhuey 13y ago
  A fellow Christian and scientist named Dr. James Tour explained that many creationists do not understand the limits of the scientific method. Dr. Tour concludes, "I am sympathetic to the arguments on the matter and I find some of them intriguing, but the scientific proof is not there, in my opinion." http://www.jmtour.com/personal-topics/the-scientist-and-his-%E2%80%9Ctheory%E2%80%9D-and-the-christian-creationist-and-his-%E2%80%9Cscience%E2%80%9D/ http://www.jmtour.com/personal-topics/the-scientist-and-his-... So in response to people clamoring for creationism in the classroom, he suggests this: "So what should be taught in schools regarding evolution? As I wrote, I am not a proponent of Intelligent Design for the reasons I state above: I can not prove it using my tools of chemistry to which I am bound in the chemistry classroom; the same tools to which I commensurately bind my evolutionist colleagues. But I think that a better approach might include more teaching about evolution, namely coverage of legitimate scientific criticisms of neo-Darwinism and disputes about the origin of the first life. That would be more balanced."
  - FrankenPC 13y ago
    That sounds like a fair and lively scientific discussion to have. It's a shame that won't happen.
  - thirdtruck 13y ago
    When I see Tour conflate the discussion of evolution with abiogenesis, however, I lose all hope for the quality of such a debate.
- FrankenPC 13y ago
  I disagree. What it teaches is how to accept dogma without reservation. It's a brainwashing technique on par with anything the CIA could come up with.
  - fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
    >What it teaches is how to accept dogma without reservation. Yes, I agree. I didn't mean that religion should be taught, I'd rather a course that teaches about religion.
    - FrankenPC 13y ago
      Oh, sure. I really enjoyed studying all the different religions in college. Somehow, I don't think that's ever going to happen in this case. Can't have any competition.

fnordfnordfnord 13y ago

As an Atheist, I am not generally opposed to a religion class, even a compulsory one. Religion is a reality, and ignoring it is as bad as ignoring any other reality. Teaching creationism is worse than a mere study of religion because it promotes rote memorization of demonstrably incorrect ideas as facts.

stephenhuey 13y ago
A fellow Christian and scientist named Dr. James Tour explained that many creationists do not understand the limits of the scientific method. Dr. Tour concludes, "I am sympathetic to the arguments on the matter and I find some of them intriguing, but the scientific proof is not there, in my opinion." http://www.jmtour.com/personal-topics/the-scientist-and-his-%E2%80%9Ctheory%E2%80%9D-and-the-christian-creationist-and-his-%E2%80%9Cscience%E2%80%9D/ http://www.jmtour.com/personal-topics/the-scientist-and-his-... So in response to people clamoring for creationism in the classroom, he suggests this: "So what should be taught in schools regarding evolution? As I wrote, I am not a proponent of Intelligent Design for the reasons I state above: I can not prove it using my tools of chemistry to which I am bound in the chemistry classroom; the same tools to which I commensurately bind my evolutionist colleagues. But I think that a better approach might include more teaching about evolution, namely coverage of legitimate scientific criticisms of neo-Darwinism and disputes about the origin of the first life. That would be more balanced."
- FrankenPC 13y ago
  That sounds like a fair and lively scientific discussion to have. It's a shame that won't happen.
- thirdtruck 13y ago
  When I see Tour conflate the discussion of evolution with abiogenesis, however, I lose all hope for the quality of such a debate.
FrankenPC 13y ago
I disagree. What it teaches is how to accept dogma without reservation. It's a brainwashing technique on par with anything the CIA could come up with.
- fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
  >What it teaches is how to accept dogma without reservation. Yes, I agree. I didn't mean that religion should be taught, I'd rather a course that teaches about religion.
  - FrankenPC 13y ago
    Oh, sure. I really enjoyed studying all the different religions in college. Somehow, I don't think that's ever going to happen in this case. Can't have any competition.