Creationism growing in European schools

[grahamiam]

quote:Originally posted by sz_matyas
2) The debate was over ID being taught in the schools, which is significantly different from the position presented by the Creation Museum and most scholarly ID people dismiss them as crackpots. As such the CM should have no bearing on the debate (though it clearly does on both sides).

quote:From the text in the OP
Creationism growing in European schools

[sz_matyas]

You are correct that they use creationism in the original article. The reason I was using the ID debate is that they played fast and loose with definitions and in the appendix they treated them as the same

quote:
In the American state of Kansas and Pennsylvania school councils have tried to get IDinto the curriculum.

Even among creationists, many regard the Creation Museum as crackpots, making the point just as relevant (a number of creationists are willing to accept an old[er] earth for example). Furthermore the original debate here was on ID being taught in schools.

[akots]

quote:Originally posted by sz_matyas
...
Perhaps an easier way to see the dogmatism involved in this type of science is to look at Watson's recent remarks on race and intelligence.
...

I'd hate to say that but Watson has a very scientific point of view on the problem. Yes, it is politically incorrect but from the scientific point, all his statements are really evident, easily provable, and nobody seriously doubts anything he stated. The thing is that all these publications are really shined upon and he had used some improper wording at times however directly stating the obvious.

[Stapel]

A crea-evo thread at CDZ....., and I missed it.

My 2 cents:
Creationism and evolution are not contradictive. It is, in fact, quite ridiculous to debate the two in one topic, imho.


Creationism is a religious belief. I don't believe in any gods, so I pretty much think any idea our universe was created by one or more gods are nonsense, if not ridiculous. However, I think parents have the right to send kids to religious schools. I find it dumb, stupid, weird and consider it wrong for the education of their children, but nevertheless, it is a right.

ToE is a scientific theory. It has flaws, but also some solid proven features. It is the only scientific plausibel theory of the origion of our world, we have. Therefor, it should be taught to all.

Anyway:
If the ToE will be proven COMPLETELY wrong tomorrow, I still see no reason to adopt the (imho ridiculous) creationism 'theory'.
If the existence of any gods will be COMPLETELY proven tomorrow, I see no reason to debunk the ToE.


A last comment: when people think the world is 6000 years old, there must be something that blinds them for solid scientific proof.

[Darkness]

quote:Originally posted by Stapel

A last comment: when people think the world is 6000 years old, there must be something that blinds them for solid scientific proof.

True. Especially considering the fact that radiocarbon dating (radio-active decay) can accurately determine the age of carbonaceous materials up to about 60000 years...

[akots]

Well, whoever is still interested, it is now becoming an official problem in the US and National Academy of Science even had to publish a book on the matters:
http://nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11876

You can either order it or download pdf for free.

[Shabbaman]

quote:For educators, students, teachers, community leaders, legislators, policy makers, and parents who seek to understand the basis of evolutionary science, this publication will be an essential resource.

I take it that it has a lot of pictures then