When a form of creationism (give it any name you want) is able to produce testable predictions then it can be considered science. Until then “design” or “guided” lies in the realms of “belief” – and as such should be kept away from the science class.

The evidence we have available to us at the moment points strongly to life “happening by itself” as the best of those four options. One thing I would disagree with is the requirement for God to exist or not exist.

While I personally do not believe in things like faeries, witches, demons and deities it is not a requirement for evolution to be correct.

I know both sides claim they have their “facts” yet, I have not seen any conclusive evidence that their “facts” can be independently tested and verified using the sound principles of the scientific method.

I fully agree with TW, students should question what they are being taught. Asking questions is the best way of gaining knowledge!

Adeistic
You didn’t quite understand some of what TW said. There is no contradiction between teaching children science and encouraging them to question you. How did you get the idea he said students shouldn’t question the content of what they were taught?

The whole concept of a good teacher must mean someone who encourages questioning. The most important role for a teacher is to encourage the student to want to learn how to gain knowledge for themselves.

Both students and teachers need to accept that criticism of their work is not criticism of their being.

This can’t be the case unless both sides are mentally free to point out the errors of the other.

As a teacher in the United States I got to see the lack of respect for educators not just from the students but also from the parents. The parents expect the teachers to teach kids the things that parents should be responsible for, yet they don’t expect teachers to teach their kids what they’re there to teach, science, biology, languages etc. Teachers are not parents and they shouldn’t be expected to be parents, just so that the parents can excuse themselves from their parental responsibilities. So what f the educator teaches evolution at school? The parent can still teach creationism at home.

Another thing I learned by teaching in the U.S. is that the culture of entitlement is overpowering. It’s the concept of deserving certain things, of ownership, just because you’re an American. So teachers have lost their freedom to be educators to the entitled demands of the masses. The nature of entitlement is that it gives people confidence where there shouldn’t be any, and allows people to avoid criticism. I had a freshman student who used the following argument to complain about a low grade: “I was a straight A student in high school so I can’t get a low grade.” I said, “yes you can and here’s why you got the low grade.” Next day I was faced with a complaint to the dean for being disrespectful to the student and not being understanding enough of her mental distress at having to adapt to being in college.

There appears to be a paradox in what you are saying. If you suggest that children should not be allowed to question or challenge content, then how can you also complain that teachers should not have allowed creationist ideas to spread?

There is no paradox there at all.

Teachers are there to teach the students. The children should be encouraged to question what the teachers are teaching and the teacher should be able to teach it in such a manner that the student learns the correct information (for want of better words).

Allowing nonsense to spread is not the result of pupils questioning the teacher (in my school, every teacher was put through hell on every subject, yet creationism was never thought of as a science), it is the result of teachers not teaching.

Secondly, why are teachers allowing these ideas to spread in the first place?”

There appears to be a paradox in what you are saying. If you suggest that children should not be allowed to question or challenge content, then how can you also complain that teachers should not have allowed creationist ideas to spread?

Before you assume that I’m a creationist (shudder) I’d like to be clear that creationism is utter stupidity and should not be allowed into science classrooms. Perhaps you are actually saying that you’d like to see teachers better prepared to refute creationist fantasies and better backed up by educational and political authorities.

There really should be *no* ‘creation vs evolution’ debate because biological evolution is an empirically demonstrated *fact*. Science has effectively disproven the creation myth in the Book of Genesis, but religionists refuse to admit this.

How did this deplorable state of affairs come about? America is almost entirely responsible because religious fundamentalism has too long been unopposed in America and educational standards are far too low in the US. I think that the time is long past where any educated person can afford to be polite about this ignorant idiocy.

If the lesser scientists (biology teachers with basic degrees) don’t understand, or are more persuaded by their religious beliefs, it won’t get taught. Even if you force it, mandate the teachers to spend X time on it, if they don’t believe it, they will get the message across to their students.

Hell, all they have to do is say, at the beginning of class “I don’t believe this, but they make me teach it to you, so open your books to page….”

And they wonder why all the scientists are coming out of Japan, India and Korea?

Also, one in ten believe in the literal interpretation of creationism? I wish it were that low here in the States.

He said: “The number of Muslim students has grown considerably in the last 10 to 20 years and a higher proportion of Muslim families do not accept evolutionary theory compared with Christian families.

Oddly, Islamic school children are a significant Minority in schools, so how have they cowed the teachers to such a degree?