DU this poll: Should Creationism be taught in school

[DuaneBidoux]

DU this poll: should creationism (read religion) be taught in science class.

<http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/1123/p11s02-legn.html>

[medeak]

1. 80% no

looks like they don't need DU

[pnutchuck]

2. done

fucking bible beaters!!!!!

[bvar22]

3. Voted.

85% agree that anything other than Darwin's theory should NOT be taught in a Science Class.

[bvar22]

4. Now 91%.

Most people that read the Christian Science Monitor are educated and have some critical thinking skills.

[Eugene]

5. 91.5% no

only 47 votes.

[phantom power]

6. is "intelligent design" a falsifiable theory?

If it's not, then it just isn't science.

Evolutionary theories (it's not like there's just one, unchanged since Darwin) give rise to falsifiable predictions, and do-able "experiments" (or, at least, suggest things to look for in the fossil record, etc).

If somebody wants to suggest some do-able experiments that can either support or falsify "intelligent design", then they can claim to be a scientific theory.

[Fleurs du Mal]

12. It doesn't even qualify as a scientific theory...

as there are no empirical means by which to test its validity.

[phantom power]

23. I bet it's *possible* to treat it as science: "If I.D. is true,

then we should expect consequences X, Y, Z. Otherwise, we have falsified it."

Of course, nobody who believes in Intelligent Design has any intention of doing such a thing, because their interest in it has nothing to do with science, regardless of their rhetoric.

Asking for falsifiable predictions would call their bluff. They wouldn't go there, since they don't want it falsified, they just want to believe it.

Of course, I'm assuming they would even know (or care) what a falsifiable prediciton is, or how science actually works. What are the odds.

[Javaman]

7. 91.4% no

[Walt Starr]

8. c'mon, DU, there have only been 75 votes!

DU this one and ram it down their throats!

[whistle]

9. The poll actually asks a different question....

...and does not use the word "creatism" or "religion", but rather it uses "intellegent design" and "higher power" which is clearly much different in the minds of many persons than the term "God". However, my response is still "No" and that is the way I voted. I think the poll is flawed because it falled to properly clarify it's terms "intellegent design" and "higher power". I hope it helps:

<snip>

Should 'intelligent design' be a part of the science curriculum in US public schools?
No. Anything other than Darwin's theory of evolution has no place in a science classroom.
88.6%
Yes. Students should be exposed to the theory that a higher power may have created life.
11.4%

[DuaneBidoux]

18. Yea a different question: like reframing "Estate Tax" to "Death Tax"

Trust me on this, they've studied the verbiage carefully and are using it to get creationism into the schools. It's not just any intelligent design they're after, but even if they were, "intelligent design" isn't science.

[Gothmog]

10. done

92.7% no

[Sugarbleus]

11. No, but I have another question....

Is "Creationism" taught in Jewish or Islamic schools?? It's a thought that just came to me since the other two religions stem from the same roots as Christianity. Curious

[Kber]

29. Traditional Jewish stance

is that anything prior to Abraham should be not be taken as literally as the rest of the bible. (Talking about the "fundamentalist" Jewish view here.)

We do study the creation myth, not to learn the "blow by blow" events. Rather, the concentration is on the implications of good and evil, free will versus the happiness provided for in the garden on eden, etc. From a religious and ethical point of view, there are serious questions and considerations.

[Sugarbleus]

30. Thank you...

Sometimes I think I'd like to convert to Judaism.... :)

[Fleurs du Mal]

13. No = 93.3%

[Olivier]

14. Strange question

So we have the choice between :
- Yes. Students should be exposed to the theory that a higher power may have created life.
- No. Anything other than Darwin's theory of evolution has no place in a science classroom.

There are also some theories other than the Darwinism (or complementary) that try to explain the evolution, without being creationism. And the idea a higher power could have created life, even if it has nothing to do in a science class, can perfectly match the Darwin's theory. For example, if "creating life" is bringing the necessary material for enabling the first micro-organism to appear.

I voted "No" anyway :)

[zippy890]

16. The 'No' answer has a bias

The way its written sounds bad, like teaching a scientific approach is narrow-minded.

jeezuz they can turn things inside out to suit their needs

:eyes:

[Heyo]

15. It's all in context....

.... you teach the kids... "some people believe this, other people believe this, still other believe this... " and so on...

The kids can make their own choice on which side they come down on when they are ready.

Nothing wrong with evolution and natural selection, for a creationist, just because we were not created through abiogenesis doesn't mean specied don't evolve.

I am a creationist/higher power/greater truth type deist..., but I believe in evolution and the big bang and all that... there is no great confict between science and religion, other than the one created by *people*... mostly overzealous religious people and the Catholic Church.

Heyo

[CatBoreal]

24. The Catholic Church...

...came out as in support of the Theory of Evolution, saying that it was unquestionably true, but that 'Man' was still had a special place in God(TM)'s eyes during Vatican II.

[goddess40]

17. I'm all for teaching creationism

as long as they can show how flawed it is and that most religions have some type of creation myth.

[Eugene]

22. Like the Earth centered universe of spontaneous generation...

Alternate non-scientific views can be presented
(and debunked) as part of the history of science.
But science must be taught from scientific methods,
not from faith and not from the authority of
ancient texts.

[goddess40]

27. You're right nt

[mainer]

19. Yeah, it should be taught. While laughing.

We need a Jon Stewart course in creationism. "Look at the girl next to ya, fellas. i tell ya, she's a RIB!"

[Lone_Star_Dem]

20. 87.1% No 12.9% Yes

Watch this closely we are being watched by freepers. They destroyed a poll I posted here in the past week.

[kodi]

21. nope. it does not pass the test as scientific

might as well teach kids how to cast spells in science class too if they let creationism be taught as science. even to consider it corrupts any rational sense of scientific method.

the religio-fascists can not be allowed to define what is reality and science. mankind has crawled out of the dirt to travel to the moon as a race. it can no longer masquerade superstition, myth, and ancient dogma as science.

[Kber]

25. Absolutely Creationism should be taught in school.

Sunday school that is.

Public schools should stick with actual science and leave biblical studies strictly alone!

[lil-petunia]

26. only 200+ votes. but it is the CHRISTIAN SCIENCE monitor

although, they play really fair with news stories, I have to say.

probably some of the best reporting on some single issues across the board. they take journnalism seriously. a rarity, and a pleasure.

[alfredo]

28. You believe in intelligent design?

You haven't been to a Toby Keith concert? Nothing intelligent there.