Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, Moderators, move, protect, rollback, Administrators
27,336
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 576:
Line 576: − − − − ==No== − I think whoever asked this question doesn't understand what science classes are supposed to consist of. It doesn't matter (in this case) whether you're an athiest or a Christian or religious or whatever: Creationism is not SCIENCE. I'm not saying that because I don't believe in it, but any scientist, even a religious one, will tell you that there is no proof of intelligent design - that is, nothing that can be called SCIENTIFIC PROOF has been offered. It's a theory without proof. Evolution is a theory with what many scientists believe is proof - mainly fossils etc. Whether or not you think the fossils are fake or left over from Noah's Ark or whatever, they're "solid" proof. Science teaches scientific theories, not scripture, no matter how true scripture may be, because it's just not Science. Science can be chemistry, or biology, or physics. So far no-one has found a scientific argument (there have been arguments, but none that can be called scientific) for God or Intelligent Design. ID might've happened, but there's been no scientific evidence.
Debate:Should Creationism/Intelligent design be taught as a scientific alternative to evolution in public schools? (view source)
Revision as of 05:39, March 3, 2020
, 05:39, March 3, 2020Reverted edits by Barrymore12 (talk) to last revision by Pious
Naturalistic views on the origin of life and the universe as we know it do have spiritual and religious implications. Evolution compromises many people's religious faith, which is very understandable. This is a concern that I think needs to be addressed honestly, and putting intelligent design into science classes is not an honest way to do that. I think that it should be addressed in religious contexts. But let science be science. Undermining science is not a way to address the cultural and religious concerns of people.
Naturalistic views on the origin of life and the universe as we know it do have spiritual and religious implications. Evolution compromises many people's religious faith, which is very understandable. This is a concern that I think needs to be addressed honestly, and putting intelligent design into science classes is not an honest way to do that. I think that it should be addressed in religious contexts. But let science be science. Undermining science is not a way to address the cultural and religious concerns of people.