Ban Creationism and Intelligent Design in the science classroom as federal law.

[daws101]

I thought science was open minded not close minded. Since they can't prove origins nor prove there is no God why would they rule out a possibility without proof.

You can't logically prove the non-existence of something so your comment is meaningless. Science IS open minded and accepts any scientific evidence. Creationism/ID is not scientific.

Why not?

creationism is base on a false premise...

 

[Steven_R]

I have a real problem with this idea that we teach creationism alongside evolution and let the children sort it out for themselves and that problem boils down to this: the kids don't have the requisite knowledgebase to understand the intricacies of what they are learning. How does a 9th grader master a subject that graduate students struggle with? Instead, we just tell them evolution is what the experts believe is right because of things like fossils and genetics and that there may be disagreements among biologists over the details and there are unanswered questions, but this is what science has determined is the best answer to the questions.

I think it is very dangerous to tell children to learn something...but not really because the science is unsound. If you start telling children to just disregard scientists in one area, what's going to stop them from ignoring them in others? It might smack of indoctrination, but kids just don't have the ability to think critically in such a way to be able to evaluate the very limited information given to them. There's no disagreement among biologists over the general framework of evolution, so why pretend there is in a 9th grade science classroom?

But it also raises the question of where do we stop shoehorning in "alternate theories and viewpoints" in the classrooms of teenagers? Does every idea get a say or equal time? Do we bring up Holocaust Denial during History class as a legitimate viewpoint? How about the merits of AIDS Denial during Health? There are people who still believe in the Geocentric model. Do they get equal time when discussing the Solar System? How about Sovereign Citizens during lectures on the three branches of government and the Constitution? First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics and why they really don't apply to the Water-based Engine the Government keeps under wraps? Which alternative ideas do we pick and choose from and how do we pick them?