Creationism in science classrooms (an argument for)

HI Shadow, It depends on what you mean by "creationism".The bulk of those who are referred to as creationists (in the context of this forum) are Christian biblical literalists. They are anti-evolution fundamentalists. If given a free reign to teach creationism in schools, these guys would be teaching stuff like;

• The Earth is about six thousand years old.
• The Theory of Evolution is an atheist conspiracy.
• Humans have no common ancestry with apes.
• The Noahic Flood was a real event.
• Adam and Eve were real people and our ancestors.

And so on.This is a far cry from the kind of creationism that you're talking about, which suggests only that the first origins of life were intelligently guided. It's a very different beast. Call it "creationism-lite".Creationism-lite cannot, at present, be disproved. In all probability, it will never be disproved, since we will almost certainly never now the exact circumstances in which life first arose. It joins the ranks of an infinite number of equally unfalsifiable ideas. All we can say at present is that creationism-lite is a very weak hypothesis, given that not a shred of positive evidence exists in its favour and that it makes a number of unsupported assumptions. Teaching creationism-lite in schools strikes me as pointless, since there is basically nothing to teach.Full-on Christian fundamentalist creationism on the other hand, can be and has been disproved. It is a false doctrine. We know, with as high a degree of certainty as is imaginable, that there was no Flud, no Adam & Eve, no special creation. Teaching this kind of stuff in schools would be irresponsible, a form of lying to kids. The only reason why anyone would want to teach this errant codswallop is because certain highly vocal creationists want everyone else to share in their religious dementia. That is ethically reprehensible and, in the specific case of the USA, a breach of the Establish Clause.Mutate and Survive

---

On two occasions I have been asked, — "Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?" ... I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. - Charles Babbage

Not because of the evidence? As far as I am concerned. I see no reason to believe such a thing, but really, it's up to you want you want to believe. Just don't confuse your beliefs with science. Yeah, I noticed. You have misunderstood what Dr A is saying. He said that creationist beliefs (such as in a six thousand year old Earth) have been falsified and thus proved to be no more than religious dogma. That puts them beyond the scope of science class. Hopefully by intelligent ones, yes. But the truth of the matter is that there are a lot of teachers out there who are only too keen to teach kids wrong-headed nonsense like the six thousand year old Earth in their classes. So what do we do about those bozos?I do believe that both the Genesis creation myth and the modern Theory of Evolution have their place in the classroom. I just prefer that the religion go in a religious education classroom and that the science go in a science classroom. Any other set up is just going to give fundamentalist Christian teachers an opportunity to preach Biblical literalist/inerrantist rubbish in their classes and that's unacceptable.Mutate and Survive

---

On two occasions I have been asked, — "Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?" ... I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. - Charles Babbage

You take umbrage too quick at my use of the word myth. I was using it in this sense of the term; myth
n.
1. a. A traditional, typically ancient story dealing with supernatural beings, ancestors, or heroes that serves as a fundamental type in the worldview of a people, as by explaining aspects of the natural world or delineating the psychology, customs, or ideals of society: the myth of Eros and Psyche; a creation myth.The creation myth provided in Genesis 1 and the further myth provided in Gen 2 fit the bill perfectly. They are undeniably mythic.I did not mean to simply say that the story was untrue, although if you like, I will say that.Mutate and Survive

---

On two occasions I have been asked, — "Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?" ... I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. - Charles Babbage