NEWS: Evolution Rules / Creationism Drools

Because your definition of the word "theory" is not the same as the scientific one.

When you say. "I have a theory", it means "I've this idea that I haven't tested yet."

When a scientist says "We have a theory." it means "We have an idea that explains practically all the data we have at this point, but it's impossible to prove absolutely conclusively." ... in the case of evolution, because no one can go back in time, and we haven't been able to observe a particular species in person for 10,000 years. So you have this theory that is so solid that no one who knows anything doubts that it occurs in some way, but it can't be called "fact".

meh.

[Edited on Jan 15, 2005 by Keith]

Of course creationism is rubbish, and has been (easily) proven as such by scientists. My point was that despite this these people still get away with ignoring this and railroading it into syllabuses.

Science spent hundreds of years being oppressed by religion and having its proponents dismissed as heretics. What scares me, is an increasingly vocal faction are now being allowed to question science and in some places turn the clock back.

Science acknowledges we never know the answer, but states based on what we know, this is what is likely; when enough evidence builds up we have a paradigm shift. It tries to be openminded, although individuals with research grants and vested interests may disagree, it does move in the direction of truth through debate (eventually).

Religion doesn't. The bible is based on a few of the hundreds of gospels, usually those which favour the white, rich male, and ignores the rest. We now have people with a whole set of beliefs based on a selective set of chapters, edited over ?000 years.

Ok it's not religious ...YET!!!Often extremist groups use "thin end of the wedge" techniques as part of their agenda.

For example in the 80's a group of religious extremists campaigned against D&D and argued that all RPG's should carry a Government helath warning.From that they could have argued that RPG@s relly were bad for your helath and then pushed to have them baned.

Beware these people as they always have an agenda. How long before SG comes under their gaze....

there is sure alot more proof that evolution is a fact more than creationism !!!! if you think "god" snapped his fingers and man was created, you have some serious issues to deal with, how fucking unrealistic is that ??? just because the bible says something, doesn't make it a fact never to be questioned. lets not forget that religous people once thought the world was flat, that the sun revolves around the earth, and that the earth was the only planet - and lynched, killed or banished anyone who said otherwise. using the bible as thier "all knowing power" - and yup, they were wrong wrong wrong

I don't even know where to begin, so I won't. I think this whole thread is kinda silly.

Evolution is a theory to those that don't believe in it, just as Creationism is a theory to those that don't believe in it as well.

I totally agree with your sentiment, but the wording is flawed, because you use two different usages for "theory" in the same sentence.

Half of the problem with the whole debate is one of semantics. Its been stated by several people already, but there is a difference between the scientific definition of a theory and the common usage definition. The common usage one is more akin to the scientific definition of a hypothesis (but not quite, since a valid hypothesis requires that it must be testable). Actually, the common usage of theory is more closely related to the word "conjecture". (And just to be clear, scientific theories are not facts, they can be altered, tweaked, revised, and completely overhauled in the face of new evidence, but they do represent the best conclusions that can be drawn from the current set of collective knowledge).

From a scientific standpoint, Creationism is pure conjecture ... it can't be even glorified with the label of hypothesis, much less theory. And afterall, that's what we are talking about here, science and science education. Creationism/Intelligent Design has no valid scientific underpinning and therefore has no place in the science ciriculum. The problem is that Creationists (and many other non-science types) believe that science is somehow democratic and it is subject to public opinion. This isn't to say that Creationism can't be a part of peoples lives. If that's your belief, so be it. It just has no place in the classroom. This is what we have churches for.

To be fair, evolution IS a theory, and it is not without problems. But, as has already been mentioned, gravity is also a theory, with its own set of problems, but no one wants to put stickers in books pointing this out.

Maybe if we actually did a better job about teaching kids about the scientific method we wouldn't be having this silly arguement.

Check out this really good article on Salon from last week for some nice insight into the minds of the Creationist crowd. Freaky!!

Wow, that got way more wordy than I intended ... sorry!


[Edited on Jan 15, 2005 2:24PM]

This makes me want to cry.

The only problem would be that creationism isn't even a theory. It is a unprovable guess. It can't even be considered a hypothesis because a hypothesis is an educated guess and the use of any education would lead to something other then creationism.

What does?

I love you.

Just because it's a theory, does not mean it's wrong. Gravity is a theory.....

Some things don't change

This is real science.

you beat me to it.

assuming, of course, that it makes you want to cry for the same reasons.

i fucking give up on this topic.

I feel like all this debate about the definition of a theory and whatnot really misses the most important point. it's i]science class, so how about they learn science? do they teach french in algebra class? whether the parents believe in evolution or not shouldn't even be an issue. the kids are there to learn science, and creationism is an entirely different subject.

The teachers are there to teach the kids FACTS and (in my opinion) to be able to think for themselves. If a child thinks the whole thing through then chooses to believe then fair enough. I have no problem with that.

I do have a problem when science teachers are stopped from teaching science though.

Very true. I thought for a moment you meant the discussion.

LOL!! 5,000 yr old T-Rex who ate humans.

The things is, us scientists don't throw around words like "theory" and "hypothesis" lightly. They are very important terms that have specific meanings and we can't have any proper science discussion (much less education) without using the proper language. This central to the scientific method, without which we can't have science or science education.

Creationists see the "theory" part of evolution theory as way to attack it since most people don't make the distinction between the scientific and casual meaning. Most people would probably agree that we shouldn't teach religion in science class. But they call creationism a theory (which, of course, it is not) or call it Intellingent Design, which gives it the appearance (to your average Joe) that it has some sort of scientific validity and therefore should be on equal footing with evolution in science class. Its by doing this that Creationists are trying to get it into the science classroom, by confusing the terminolgy. They know its not science, they just don't care.

ok, i guess we're crying for the opposite reasons then.

i'm crying because every time an intelligent person says, in response to stories like this, "well, evolution is just a theory!" it's further evidence that the creationist idiots are winning this battle.

essentially they are killing two birds with one stone: not only are they waging a successful disinformation campaign against one of the fundamental underpinnings of modern biology, but in so doing they are clouding the public's mind about what science actually is, and thereby undermining science as a whole.

even though i said above that i'm truly sick of this topic, i do feel it's important that the facts and stakes are clear, so here's my two cents:

evolution is a fact, a phenomenon that is easily observed in the laboratory in simple organisms, and that has been painstakingly documented in various vertebrates in the field as well. that is, evolution is not about paleontology or the "origin of life"; it is taking place in every living organism as you read this.

there is also abundant evidence of evolution from the fossil record, and, more recently, from comparative molecular/genomic analyses.

natural selection, sexual selection, kin selection, and various neo-darwinist theories have been proposed to explain evolution, and, so far, no serious scientific challenge to those theories has arisen because, as a whole, they provide the most complete and satisfying account and make the most fruitful predictions.

no other industrialized nation on earth would even consider letting the enemies of science determine their science curriculum, and if the u.s. is serious about maintaining its leadership role in science (which shows disturbing signs of slipping away already), this shit has to stop!

consider this. genesis is part of the jewish bible. do you think israeli high-schools or universities would teach genesis in astronomy or biology classes? somehow i doubt it.

[Edited on Jan 16, 2005 by in_a_blue_state]

Thank you.

I think my thoughts were put well in the last two posts.

So ther then that. Sexdwarf said,"Whoops, I just theoretically fell out of my chair." And that made me laugh some.

I don't think it is for different reasons.
I hope you don't mind that I snipped your post by the way but huge posts made of quotes bother me for some reason.

My point about science teachers being left alone to teach science is beacause evoloution is science. Creationism has no place in the classroom in my opinion.

I said I have no problems with kids beliving in creationism if they have thought it all through and I stand by that. Anything else smacks of Big Brother to me. They should do this in their own time though, not in school time.

In my dream world religous matters have no place in schools or in politics.....I won't hold my breath though.

Edited for clarity.

[Edited on Jan 16, 2005 by Leccy]